OF  Pft^^. 

flUr.  «9  1961 


Q  Q  O 


An   lntroductior>^^    ^^.^^ 

*     NOV  24  19i 

To  the  Study  of  the  X^Jf     ' — r—^?-- — . 

Books  of  the  ^^i£§lGM  ^f  ^.'^ 

NEW  TESTAMENT 


By  John  H.   Kerr,  D.D. 

Professor  of  Greek  Exegesis  and  New  Testament  Literature  in  the 
San  Francisco  Theological  Seminary 


With  an  Introductory   Note  by 
Professor  Benjamin  B.  Warfield,   D.D. 

Of  Princeton  Theological  Seminary 


Third  Edition,  Revised 


Fleming  H.   Revell  Company 

Chicago  New  York  Toronto 

Publithers  of  Evangelical  Literature 


Entered  according  to  Act  of  Congress,  m  the  year  1892,  by 

FLEMING  H.  REVELL  COMPANY, 

In  the  Office  of  the    Librarian  of   Congress,  at   Washington,  D.  C. 

All  Rights  Reserved. 


TO 

BENJAMIN    B.   WARFIELD,   D.   D., 

Professor  of  Theology  in   Princeton  Theological  Seminary, 

this  book  is  gratefully  inscribed, 

inasmuch  as 

its  inception  and  completion  are  largely  due 

to  his  kind  encouragement 

and 

wise  counsel. 


PREFACE. 


This  book  is  the  outgrowth  of  a  series  of  ser- 
mons preached  on  the  Gospels  nine  years  ago  in 
my  first  pastoral  charge.  These  sermons  were  re- 
written and  published  in  the  Presbyterian  Journal 
of  Philadelphia.  Favorable  notice  having  been  ac- 
corded these  articles,  I  was  led  to  continue  them  by 
writing  introductory  articles  to  the  other  books  of 
the  New  Testament  for  the  same  paper.  The  kind 
encouragement  and  advice  of  Professor  Warfield, 
under  whose  able  instruction  in  Allegheny  Seminary 
I  was  permitted  to  study  for  four  years,  led  me  to 
think  of  rewriting  the  whole  series  with  the  view  of 
publishing  them  in  book  form  when  completed.  As 
my  ministry  progressed,  I  was  also  impressed  with 
the  need  of  having  a  popular  treatise  on  New  Testa- 
ment Introduction  for  uses  of  instruction  among  the 
people  of  my  charge.  These  things  led  me  on  in 
my  work  until  it  is  now  completed.  To  the  wise 
council  and  timely  criticisms  of  Dr.  Warfield  I  am 
deeply  indebted,  for  through  the  years  that  have 
elapsed  since  the  inception  of  this  work,  he  has  re- 
peatedly encouraged  me. 

The  original  articles  as  they  appeared  in  the 
Presbyterian  Journal  have  been  entirely  rewritten, 
and  I  have  attempted  to  make  them  more  even  in 

[V] 


Vi  PREFACE, 

every  way.  By  using  such  fragments  of  time  as 
could  be  spared  from  the  many  and  r  "gular  duties  cf 
my  ministry,  the  work  has  through  many  difficulties 
and  after  many  delays  been  finished.  I  have  striven 
to  be  independent  in  my  investigations,  and  to  call 
no  man  my  maste>  I  have  availed  myself  of  all 
sources  of  information  that  I  could  command,  and 
have  traversed  the  whole  ground  covered  in  this  book 
a  number  of  times.  I  have  freely  quoted  from  va- 
rious authorities,  and  some  names  appear  frequently 
upon  the  pages  of  this  book  because  I  have  always 
found  them  to  be  safe  guides.  I  have  not  striven  to 
set  forth  any  new  and  startling  theories,  such  as  are 
fashionable  and  popular  in  these  days.  Nor  can  I 
hope  to  have  settled  some  of  the  intricate  questions 
that  are  touched  upon  by  the  science  of  Introduction. 
The  effort  has  been  made  to  present,  not  the  processes 
of  study,  but  the  results  of  patient,  painstaking  in- 
vestigations. 

Professor  Weiss  in  the  Preface  to  his  masterly 
Manual  of  Introduction  to  the  New  Testament,  says  : 
"In  my  view,  the  main  thing  in  an  Introduction  to 
the  New  Testament  is  neither  criticism  nor  apolo- 
getics, but  the  actual  initiation  into  a  living  histor- 
ical knowledge  of  Scripture."  This  states  exactly 
my  own  view.  New  Testament  Introduction  must 
underlie  all  intelligent  study  of  the  Book.  The 
order  in  which  the  sciences  in  regard  to  the  New 
Testament  should  be  studied  is,  first,  Introduction  ; 
second.  Textual  Criticism ;  third.  Exegesis ;  and, 
fourth,  Apologetics.  We  must  first  ascertain  what- 
ever is  ascertainable  in  regard  to  the  historical  set- 
tin|^  of  the  component  parts  of  the  New  Testament. 


PREFACE. 


Vll 


In  pursuing  this  plan,  I  have  followed  in  general  the 
course  pursued  by  Dr.  Gloag  in  his  valuable  Intro- 
ductions to  the  Pauline  and  Catholic  Epistles.  The 
order  followed  in  the  study  of  each  book  is,  Canon- 
icity,  Authorship,  Destination,  Occasion  and  Object, 
Contents,  Date  and  Place  of  Composition,  and  Pecul- 
iarities. To  these  subjects  others  have  been  added 
as  occasion  might  require  in  the  study  of  some  of 
the  books,  but  as  a  rule  this  order  has  been  followed. 
None  of  these  subjects  have  been  treated  with  the 
exhaustiveness  found  in  more  elaborate  treatises, 
and  many  interesting  subjects  have  been  entirely 
omitted,  but  this  has  arisen  from  the  desire  to  avoid 
cumbersomeness  and  to  keep  the  whole  treatise 
within  the  proper  limits  for  its  destined  object. 

The  books  to  which  I  would  confess  peculiar  in- 
debtedness are  Conybeare  and  Howson's  monumental 
work  on  the  Life  and  Letters  of  St.  Paul,  and  Dr. 
Gloag's  Introductions  to  the  Pauline  and  Catholic 
Epistles  and  the  Johannine  Writings,  as  well  as  Dr. 
Warfield's  Lectures  to  his  students  on  the  Catholic 
Epistles.  All  the  leading  Introductions  have  been 
repeatedly  consulted,  as  well  as  any  other  available 
works  that  would  shed  any  light  on  any  of  the  sub- 
jects that  are  herein  investigated.  My  most  con- 
stant companion  in  all  my  study  has  been  the  Greek 
Testament. 

It  is  with  mixed  feelings  that  I  now  put  forth  my 
Introduction.  It  is  conservative  in  its  tone,  adher- 
ing closely  to  the  old  views  in  so  far  as  they  seemed 
to  me  to  be  correct.  I  am  personally  firmly  con- 
vinced of  the  historicity  and  canonical  authority  of 
the  twenty-seven  books  that  constitute  the  New  Tes- 


Viii  PREFACE. 

tament.  And  my  hope  is  that  what  I  have  written 
may  be  of  use  to  earnest  Bible  students  in  confirm- 
ing their  faith  in  these  things  in  regard  to  the  New- 
Testament  books.  But  while  this  work  considers 
only  the  human  side  of  the  New  Testament,  let  it 
be  always  remembered  that  it  is  the  inspired  Word 
of  God.  It  must  be  handled  reverentially  and  prayer- 
fully, if  we  are  to  obtain  from  it  that  wisdom  that 
will  through  it  m.ake  us  wise  unto  salvation. 

John  H.  Kerr. 

Rock  Island^  III.  May  g,     ?Q2 


PREFACE  TO  SECOND  EDITION. 


The  call  for  a  second  edition  of  this  book  seems  to 
be  an  evidence  that  it  has  found  a  ,piace  in  the  needs 
of  students  of  the  New  Testament,  and  also  that  its 
mission  in  that  direction  is  not  -.  :t  completed.  If  this 
inference  is  correct  there  is  r  -ison,  t.^en,  why  it  should 
appear  in  this  second  edition  in  a  substantially  un- 
changed form. 

Typographical  errors  have  been  carefully  noted 
and  corrected  and  two  changes  have  been  made  in  the 
matter  of  dates.  It  has  seemed  to  me  on  further 
examination  that  the  date  of  the  Council  of  Jerusalem 
must  be  placed  as  early  as  50  A.D.,  in  order  to  make 
room  for  all  that  transpired  between  the  departure  of 
Paul  from  Antioch  on  his  second  missionary  journey 
(Acts  15:40),  and  his  arrival  at  Corinth  in  the  latter 
part  of  52  A.D.  (Acts  18:1).  I  have  also  been  con- 
strained to  date  Second  Timothy  before  the  winter  of 
2  Tim.  4:21;  Titus  3:  12,  which  I  now  believe  to  have 
been  the  winter  of  67  A.D.,  if  not  even  earlier. 

Since  the  appearance  of  the  first  edition  of  this 
book,  six  years  ago,  there  have  been  many  valuable 
contributions  made  to  this  general  subject  by  some  of 
the  greatest  scholars  of  the  present  age.  Such  Intro- 
ductions on  the  whole  or  parts  of  the  New  Testament 
as  those  of  Holtzmann,  Jiilicher,  Zahn,  Godet  and 
Gloag,  together  with  the  writings  on  kindred  subjects 
by  such   as  Harnack,  Weiss,   Ramsay,  McGiffert  and 


X  PREFACE    TO    SECOND    EDITION. 

others,  show  that  the  New  Testament  still  furnishes 
material  for  literary  and  historical  criticism.  It  surely 
is  not  claiming  too  much,  when  it  is  affirmed  that  the 
trend  of  thought  has  been  on  the  whole  decidedly  in 
the  direction  of  conservative  views.  There  have  been 
at  times  slight  eddies  in  the  currents  of  thought,  when 
it  has  seemed  for  a  little  while  as  though  they  had 
reversed  their  direction.  But  these  have  been  only 
temporary  checks  to  the  forward  progress,  and  have 
really  only  added  greater  force  to  those  currents,  when, 
refusing  to  be  turned  aside  any  longer,  they  have  flowed 
onward.  Some  questions  have  become  absolutely  set- 
tled, while  others  are  nearing  their  solution.  The  work 
of  Ramsay  and  Blass  has  made  more  sure  the  histor- 
icity and  Lucan  authorship  of  the  Acts.  Despite  in- 
dividual objectors  the  Pauline  authorship  of  the  Pas- 
toral Epistles  has  never  commanded  wider  assent  than 
since  Weiss  and  Zahn  and  Godet  have  written  in  their 
defense.  Tiie  most  difficult  problem  of  all,  that  of 
the  origin  of  the  Synoptic  Gospels,  is  doubtless  not  as 
far  from  its  correct  solution  as  it  was;  while  a  greater 
number  than  ever  before  acknowledge  the  Fourth  Gos- 
pel as  a  genuine  Johannean  product. 

It  is  a  matter  of  no  little  gratification  to  me  that 
many  of  the  positions  herein  advocated  are  among  the 
most  certainly  accepted  to-day.  I  trust  that  this  work 
will  continue  to  fill  a  place  in  the  better  understanding 
and  defense  of  the  scriptures  of  the  New  Testament. 
With  deep  gratitude  for  the  favorable  reception  of  the 
first  edition,  I  put  forth  this  second  and  revised  edition 
in  the  humble  hope  that  it  may  still  be  of  use  to  many 
in  studying  the  human  origins  and  circumstances  of 
the  various  books  of  the  New  Testament. 

John  H.  Kerr. 
San  Raphael,  California,  August ^,  i8g8. 


INTRODUCTORY  NOTE 

By  The  Rev.  Dr.  B.  B.  Warfield. 


I  FEEL  very  deeply  the  honor  which  Mr.  Kerr  has 
done  me  in  inscribing  to  me  this  book,— the  first 
.Vuits,  but  we  all  hope  by  no  means  the  last  fruits,  of 
his  studies  in  the  New  Testament.  Certainly  it  is  a 
pleasure  to  be  allowed  to  commend  to  the  wide  pub- 
lic of  Bible-students  for  which  it  is  designed,  this 
sober  and  serious  attempt  to  popularize  the  study  of 
the  human  origin  and  characteristics  of  that  body  of 
literature  which  God  has  made  the  depository  of  His 
Gospel. 

The  New  Testament  is  far  more  than  a  body  of 
literature.  It  is  the  Word  of  God.  It  is  not  simply 
the  literary  product  of  the  Church  of  the  first  age. 
It  is  the  gift  of  God  to  the  Church  of  all  ages.  Neither 
in  the  composition  of  its  individual  books,  nor  in  the 
collection  of  those  books  into  a  'Xanon,"  can  it  be 
justly  looked  upon  as  the  creation  of  the  literary 
genius  or  of  the  selective  instincts  of  the  Church. 
The  books  were  given  one  by  one  by  the  authorita- 
tive founders  of  the  Church,— the  Apostles  whom 
Christ  had  chosen  and  whom  the  Spirit  had  endowed,— 
to  the  Church  which  they  founded,  as  its  authoritative 
Rule  of  Faith  and  Practice,  its  corpus  juris;  and  the 
Pock  formed  itself  out  of  these  authoritative  books 


xii  INTRODUCTORY  NOTE, 

and  differentiated  itself  by  this  simple  fact  from  all 
other  books  or  collections  of  books.  The  principle  of 
the  Canon  has  ever  been  Apostolic  gift,  never  fitness 
to  edify  or  adaptation  to  the  Christian  consciousness: 
authoritativeness  is  its  note.  And  when  a  Christian 
approaches  it,  he  approaches  it  not  merely  as  a  book 
which  he  finds  spiritually  helpful,  far  less,  merely  as 
one  which  he  finds  literarily  interesting,  but  as  the 
Oracles  of  God. 

Nevertheless,  God  did  not  give  us  these  books,  as 
He  gave  Moses  the  Ten  Words,  written  without 
human^intermediation,  by  His  own  finger,  on  the  tables 
of  stone.  He  gave  them  not  only  by,  but  through 
men.  They  are  the  Oracles  of  God,  and  every  word 
of  them  is  a  word  of  God.  But  they  are  also  the 
writings  of  men,  and  every  word  of  them  is  a  word  of 
man.  By  a  perfect  confluence  of  the  divine  and 
human,  the  one  word  is  at  once  all  divine  and  all 
human.  So  then,  for  their  proper  and  complete  un- 
derstanding, we  must  approach  each  book  not  only  as 
the  Word  of  God,  but  also  as  the  words  of  Peter,  or 
of  Paul,  or  of  John.  We  must  seek  to  understand  its 
human  author  in  his  most  intimate  characteristics,  in 
his  trials,  experiences  and  training,  in  the  especial 
circumstances  of  joy  or  sorrow,  of  straits  or  deliver- 
ance, in  which  he  stood  when  writing  this  book,  in  his 
relations  to  his  readers,  and  to  the  immediate  needs 
and  special  situation  of  his  readers  which  gave  occa- 
sion for  his  writing, — in  all,  in  a  word,  which  went  to 
make  him  an  author,  and  just  the  author  which  he 
was, — in  order  that  we  may  understand  the  Word  of 
God  which  these  words  of  His  servants  are.  And  we 
must  approach  the  Book  as  a  whole,  with  our  eyes 


INTRODUCTORY  NOTE.  xiii 

Open  to  the  relations  borne  by  part  to  part, — their 
chronological  order,  their  mutual  interdependencies 
and  interrelations,  their  several  places  in  the  advanc- 
ing delivery  of  doctrine,  in  the  development  of  Chris- 
tian life,  in  the  elaboration  of  Church  organization 
and  worship, — in  order  that  we  may  understand  the 
method  of  God  in  creating  His  Church  through  the  la- 
bors of  these,  His  servants.  This  vast  field  is  em- 
braced in  that  literary  study  of  the  New  Testament 
to  which,  it  is  to  be  hoped,  Mr.  Kerr's  book  will  intro- 
duce many  to  whom  it  may  have  hitherto  seemed  too 
remote  or  too  recondite. 

Let  us  look  for  a  moment  at  the  chronological  list 
of  New  Testament  books  which  Mr.  Kerr  gives  us  in 
the  table  on  page  xx  :  — 

Note  how  interesting  even  such  "  a  dry  list  "  may 
become  through  what  it  suggests  as  to  the  relations 
of  the  books  to  one  another,  when  they  are  viewed 
organically  as  a  body  of  literature.  Consider  the 
obvious  domination  of  Paul  throughout  nearly  the 
whole  list,  until  Paul  passes  out  of  view  at  the  close 
of  the  seventh  Christian  decade,  and  John  fills  the 
spacious  time  of  the  end  of  the  century  with  his  Spirit- 
attuned  voice.  And,  then,  consider  the  grouping  of 
the  books.  We  observe  the  first  light  of  the  early 
dawn  of  Christian  literature  in  the  Epistle  of  James  ; 
and  we  cannot  fail  to  remark  the  aroma  of  "  begin- 
ningness  "  which  rises  from  every  verse  of  that  beauti- 
ful relic  of  really  primitive  Christianity,  in  which  the 
Church  is  a  synagogue,  and  the  sins  that  break  its  pu- 
rity and  peace  are  still  the  sins  of  Jewish  temperament 
and  Jewish  inheritance.  Then  we  have  a  long  series 
of  Paul's  Epistles, —  from  Thessalonians  to  Romans, — 


Xiv  INTRODUCTORY  NOTE. 

and  observe  already  the  ascendency  of  this  Apostle 
in  early  Christian  literature,  leading  us  to  think  of 
its  first  epoch  as  the  first  Pauline  period.  Then  come 
the  first  Gospels  ;  and  here,  at  the  end  of  the  sixth  dec- 
ade of  the  century,  we  may  draw  a  deep  line,  and  say 
that  the  Beginnings  are  over.  What  we  may  call  the 
central  literary  period  now  emerges  into  view.  How 
Pauline  it  is  !  First,  there  is  a  central  body  of  Paul's 
letters  ;  and  then  a  sequence  of  histories  and  epistles 
deeply  imbued  (with  the  exception  of  Jude)  with  the 
Pauline  spirit,  and  exhibiting  with  striking  clearness 
the  supremeness  of  Paul's  influence  throughout  the 
whole  formative  age  of  the  Church.  The  central  period 
closes,  and  is  followed  by  a  remarkable  series  of  writ- 
ings which  have  this  common  feature, — that  they  all 
may  be  looked  upon  as  the  leave-taking  of  the 
Apostles  from  the  Church  which  they  have  estab- 
lished. We  may  consider  them  the  legacy  to  the 
Church,  in  order,  of  Paul,  of  Peter,  and  of  John, — the 
whole  closing  with  that  long,  steady  glow  in  the  west- 
ern heavens,  illuminating  the  whole  pathway  of  the 
Church  through  time,  which  is  fitly  called  the 
Apocalypse. 

On  the  opposite  page,  I  have  sought  to  represent 
this  grouping  in  diagram.  It  is  sufficiently  striking 
to  add  likelihood  to  the  chronological  scheme  on 
which  it  is  founded.  And  if  we  will  look  a  little 
deeper,  we  may  perceive  lines  of  development  run- 
ning through  the  sequence  of  writings,  which  go  far 
toward  demonstrating  the  general  correctness  of  the 
order  which  has  been  assigned  them.  All  the  books 
which  I  have  classed  under  the  caption  of  The 
Beginnings  of  Christian   Literature,  share  with   the 


"TABLB 


SHOWING   THE   PERIODS    OF    NEW  TESTAMENT  LITERATURE. 


45 

Dawn. 

3 

2 

1 

< 
"o 

s> 

a 
"S 
a 

V 

H 

1  Thessalonians 

2  Thessalonians 

Galatians   

52 

53 
57 
57 
57 
58 

First  Pauline 
Period. 

I  Corinthians 

"o 

bo 
a 

Romans  •            ... 

Matthew  

C58 
C60 

First    Gospels. 

^ 

Luke 

Colossians                

62 
62 

62 
63 

Central    Paul- 
ine Period. 

The  Central  Period  of  Apostolic 
Literature. 

US 

J3 

0 

Acts     

c  64 
64 
64 

c  66 

3 

1  Peter  .         

H 

Tude 

4) 

H 

67 
67 
68 

Paul's  Legacy. 

3 
-^ 

< 

bX) 

C 

1 

U 
H 

Titus       

2  Timothy 

J3 

5 

68 
68 

Peter's 
Legacy. 

u 

Mark 

£ 

0 

bl) 

John        

90 
90 
91 
91 

96 

John's  Legacy. 

'> 

a 

2 John .           

t5 

Revelation  .   .       

[XV] 


xvi  INTRODUCTORY  NOTE. 

Epistle  of  James  the  primitive  flavor.  The  Epistles 
to  the  Thessalonians  obviously  belong  to  the  infancy 
of  the  Church,  when  men  were  learning  the  first 
principles  of  the  faith, — God  and  the  Judgment.  The 
questions  connected  with  the  mode  and  ground  of  sal- 
vation, with  which  the  great  Epistles  to  the  Galatians, 
Corinthians,  and  Romans  are  busied,  were  char- 
acteristic of  the  transition  from  Judaism  to  Chris- 
tianity. And  the  supplying  of  both  the  Jewish  and 
Gentile  sections  of  the  Church  with  their  appropriate 
Gospel,  was  a  necessary  element  In  the  foundation  of 
these  Churches.  The  Church  having  once  been 
founded,  new  needs  arose  and  new  questions  pressed 
for  solution.  The  faith  had  been  delivered  ;  now  it 
needed  establishing.  The  discussions  as  to  the  Person 
of  Christ  and  His  relation  to  His  Body,  the  Church, 
which  occupy  the  foreground  in  the  central  group  of 
Paul's  letters,  could  not  have  sprung  up  in  the  first  in- 
fancy of  the  Church.  It  belongs  to  manhood  to 
wrestle  with  the  philosophy  of  its  faith.  Nor  are 
histories  of  the  foundation  of  a  society,  such  as  we 
have  in  the  book  of  Acts,  written,  until  the  society  is 
conscious  that  the  foundations  are  already  laid. 
Hebrews,  First  Peter,  and  Jude  are  as  distinctively  not 
evangelizing,  but  confirming  literature.  All  the 
writings  of  this  central  period,  thus,  correspond  with 
the  place  assigned  to  them  chronologically  :  they  are 
characteristic  of  the  early  maturity  of  the  Church. 
Equally  loudly  do  the  contents  of  the  remaining 
books  proclaim  themselves  to  belong  to  the  period 
of  the  departure  of  the  Apostles.  It  is  not  arbitrarily 
that  Paul  busies  himself  in  the  Pastoral  Epistles,  with 


INTRODUCTORY  NOTE.  Xvii 

the  organization  of  the  Churches  :  it  is  because  the 
Churches  had  grown  so  numerous  and  so  large  that 
questions  of  organization  had  become  pressing, — it  is 
because  the  time  was  drawing  near  when  they  should 
be  left  to  self-government,  without  his  inspired  guid- 
ance. And  as  Paul  wrote  Second  Timothy  when  he 
was  already  being  poured  out  and  the  time  of  his  de- 
parture was  come,  so  Peter  wrote  Second  Peter  in  full 
realization  that  the  putting  off  of  his  tabernacle  was 
coming  swiftly,  and  in  order  to  promise  to  his  readers 
the  memoirs  of  an  eye-witness  to  Christ's  majesty : 
it  is  Peter's  swan-song.  John's  whole  body  of  writ- 
ings bears  witness  to  a  Church  long-established,  and 
may  be  justly  looked  upon  as  the  farewell  of  the 
Apostolate  to  the  Churches  they  had  founded.  Hence 
the  Gospel  of  the  Spirit,  the  final  Gospel,  and  its 
strengthening  accompanying  letter.  Hence  the  typi- 
cal messages  to  the  Churches,  opening  that  immortal 
vision  which  uncovers  to  glad  eyes  the  course  of  the 
great  conflict  through  time,  by  which  Christ  is  putting 
His  enemies  under  His  feet,  and  the  glories  of  the  final 
victory.  Only  with  these  is  the  deposit  of  faith  made 
complete,  the  basis  of  hope  impregnable,  and  the 
revelation  of  God's  love  perfect. 

This  meager  hint  may  serve  as  some  sort  of  a 
sample  of  how,  as  we  study  the  literary  history  of 
the  New  Testament,  we  may  gain  broader  and  deeper 
conceptions  of  God's  method  in  giving  His  Word  to 
man,  and  so  also  a  fuller  apprehension  of  the  supreme 
value  of  these  precious  books  and  their  fitness  to 
meet  every  human  need.  May  Mr.  Kerr's  excellent 
volume  prove  to  many,  an  introduction  not  only  to  the 


XVlii  INTRODUCTORY  NOTE. 

study  of  the  human  conditions  and  methods  by  which 
these  books  came  to  man,  but  also  to  a  fuller  under- 
standing of  the  loving  care  of  our  God  and  Saviour 
for  His  flock. 

JPrinceUm,  May,  1892. 


TABLE  OF  CONTENTS. 


CHAPTER  I. 

PAGB. 

General  Introduction i 


CHAPTER  II. 

The  Gospels — General  Introduction 4 

I.  Their  Number  and  Order 4 

II.  Their  Characteristics 6 

III.  Their  Origin 8 

CHAPTER  III. 

The  Gospels — Special  Introduction i6 

I.  The  Gospel  according  to  Matthew i6 

II.  The  Gospel  according  to  Mark 28 

III.  The  Gospel  according  to  Luke 42 

IV.  The  Gospel  according  to  John 55 

CHAPTER  IV. 

The  Acts  of  the  Apostles 74 

CHAPTER  V. 

The  Pauline  Epistles — General  Introduction 87 

I.  The  Life  and  Character  of  Paul 87 

II.  The  Writings  of  Paul 95 

[xix] 


XX  TABLE  OF  CONTENTS. 

CHAPTER  VI. 

The  Pauline  Epistles — Special  Introduction 98 

1.  The  Early  Epistles 98 

I.  First  Thessalonians 98 

II.  Second  Thessalonians 107 

III.  Galatians 113 

IV.  First  Corinthians 124 

V.  Second  Corinthians 133 

IV.  Romans 145 

2.  The  Epistles  of  the  Captivity 156 

VII.  Colossians 157 

VIII.  Philemon 167 

IX.  Ephesians 175 

X.  Philippians 187 

3.  The  Pastoral  Epistles 198 

XI.  First  Timothy 205 

XII.  Titus 215 

XIII.  Second  Timothy 222 

CHAPTER  VII. 

The  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews 230 

CHAPTER  Vin. 

The  Catholic  Epistles  —  General  Introduction 247 

I.  James 249 

II.  First  Peter 263 

III.  Second  Peter 277 

IV.  First  John 286 

V  and  VI.  Second  and  Third  John 296 

VII.  Jude 303 

CHAPTER  IX. 

The  Revelation 311 

Index  of  Authors  and  Subjects 327 


TABIvK 


SHOWING  THE  DATE  AND  PLACE  OF  COMPOSITION,  AND  THE  AUTHORS  OF  THE 
BOOKS  OF  THE  NEW  TESTAMENT. 


Book. 


Date. 


Place. 


Author. 


James 

1  Thessalonians  . 

2  Thessalonians  . . 
Galatians 

1  Corinthians  . 

2  Corinthians. . 

Romans 

Matthew 

Luke 

Colossians 

Philemon 

Ephesians 

Philippians.... 

Acts 

Hebrews 

I  Peter 

Jude 

1  Timothy 

Titus 

2  Timothy 

2  Peter 

Mark 

John 

I  John 

2 John 

ajohn 

Revelation 


45 

52 

53 

57 

57 

57 

58 
c  58 
58-60 

62 

62 

62 

63 

63 
c  64 

64 
c  66 

66 

67 

67 

68 

68 

90 

90 

91 

91 

96 


Jerusalem 
Corinth  . . , 


Ephesus 


Macedonia., 

Corinth 

Jerusalem . . 
Csesarea, . . . 
Rome 


Babylon 

Jerusalem  (?) 

Macedonia 

Ephesus 

Rome 

En  route  to  Rome 

Rome 

Ephesus 


James,  the  brother  of  our  Lord. 
Paul,  the  Apostle. 


Patmos 


Matthew,  the  Apostle. 
Luke,  the  beloved  Physician. 
Paul,  the  Apostle. 


Luke,  the  beloved  Physician. 

Paul,  the  Apostle. 

Peter     "        " 

Jude,  the  brother  of  our  Lord. 

Paul,  the  Apostle. 


Peter    " 

Mark. 

John,  the  Apostle. 


e.     H     d 


0\      Ui       In 


0\       0\       0\       C\ 


Michaelis. 


0\        0\        Ov       0\ 


^       o\     w 


Lardner. 


S"         M  «> 


01  U)  N) 

ON     -;>.      w 


De  Wette. 


I      i, 


MacKnight. 


to       to 


<jx       <ji       <jx 


Wieseler. 


o\      o\      o\      0\     ^ 


Davidson, 
ist  Ed. 


00       V4         vj 


Davidson. 
2d  Ed. 


<J\  <Jl  <JX 


ON       On 


ON         0\        Ol 


Bleek. 


OJ        OJ        w        w 


00         00       ^ 


Lumby. 


On 
1 

J 

f 

H 

52 

0\ 

£• 

a\ 

^ 

'S. 

Meyer. 


On       0\      W 


Farrar. 


On       On        On       On      oi 


Conybeare 
and 

Howson. 


00        ON        On      ui         N 


Smith's 
Dictionary. 


Dods. 


^        tn       tn 


On       On        On       On      oi 


M  00        VI         ^ 


Warfield. 


0\       0\       0\       o\ 


Alford. 


tn        en        tn 


Gloag. 


AN  INTRODUCTION  TO  THE 
NEW  TESTAMENT. 


CHAPTER   I. 

General  Introduction. 

The  Book  that  we  are  to  study  in  this  work  is  the 
New  Testament.  We  speak  of  it  as  though  it  was 
only  one  book,  while  in  reality  it  is  made  up  of 
twenty-seven  individual  books.  Of  these  books, 
five  are  historical,  twenty-one  are  epistolary,  and 
one  is  apocalyptic.  They  proceed  from  at  least 
eight  different  writers,  namely ;  Matthew,  Mark, 
Luke,  John,  Paul,  James,  Peter,  and  Jude.  Four  of 
these  men  were  Apostles,  Matthew,  John,  Paul,  and 
Peter  ;  two  were  intimate  associates  and  companions 
of  Apostles,  Mark  and  Luke  ;  and  the  other  two 
were  brethren  of  our  Lord,  James  and  Jude.  These 
eight  writers  have  their  peculiar  styles  and  modes  of 
thought,  differing  from  one  another  in  these  respects 
in  many  ways.  And  each  book  was  written  by  its 
author  with  some  specific  purpose  in  view.  But 
although  the  twenty-seven  books  constituting  the 
New  Testament  were  diverse  in  origin  and  purpose, 
and  although  small  sections  of  the  Church,  or  indi- 
vidual writers,  have  had  their  doubts  as  to  the  canon- 
ical authority  of  some  of  them,  yet  the  Church  as  a 


2  GENERAL  INTRODUCTION, 

whole  has  never  recognized  as  authoritative  Script- 
ure any  other  books  than  those  now  found  in  the 
New  Testament,  except,  of  course,  the  books  consti- 
tuting the  Old  Testament.  From  a  very  early  date 
in  the  second  century  the  New  Testament  Canon  * 
has  been  a  fixed  quantity,  even  though  the  formal 
recognition  of  the  twenty-seven  books  as  a  distinct 
and  definite  collection  cannot  be  found  until  the  time 
of  the  Council  of  Laodicea,  363  A.  D. 

It  is  not  to  be  supposed,  however,  that  the  Canon 
was  not  a  definite  and  fixed  quantity  long  before  the 
Council  of  Laodicea.  ''  The  formal  declaration  of 
the  Canon  was  not  by  any  means  an  immediate  and 
necessary  consequence  of  its  practical  settlement."* 
The  books  of  the  New  Testament  naturally,  I  might 
even  say  supernaturally,  gravitated  together.  The 
Church,  while  allowing  an  ecclesiastical  use  of  some 
of  the  so-called  Apocryphal  books,  such  as  the 
Shepherd  of  Hermas,  the  Epistle  of  Barnabas,  and 
others,  never  allowed  a  canonical  authority  to  any 
others  than  those  now  in  the  New  Testament.  The 
Canon  grew  by  virtue  of  the  inherent  divine  au- 
thority of  those  books  that  came  to  constitute  it, 
and  it  became  fixed  rather  by  the  superintending 
power  of  its  divine  Inspirer  than  by  any  formal  edict 
of  the  Church  in  any  of  its  ecclesiastical  bodies.  As 
Professor  Salmon  writes,  ''It  is  a  remarkable  fact  that 
we  have  no  early  interference  of  Church  authority  in 
the  making  of  a  Canon  ;  no  Council  discussed  this 
subject ;  no  formal  decisions  were  made.     The  Canon 

iBy  this  term  "  Canon  "  is  meant  that  collection  of  books  that  con' 
stituted  the  New  Testament. 

''Westcott's  On  the  Canon  of  the  New  Testament,  p.  5. 


GENERAL  INTRODUCTION.  3 

seems  to  have  shaped  itself;  and  if,  when  we  come 
further  on,  you  are  disposed  to  complain  of  this  be- 
cause of  the  vagueness  of  the  testimony  of  antiquity 
to  one  or  two  disputed  books,  let  us  remember  that 
this  non-interference  of  authority  is  a  valuable  topic 
of  evidence  to  the  genuineness  of  our  Gospels  ;  for 
it  thus  appears  that  it  was  owing  to  no  adventi- 
tious authority,  but  by  their  own  weight,  that  they 
crushed  all  rivals  out  of  existence."^ 

A  comparison  of  the  books  of  the  New  Testament 
with  the  body  of  literature  that  sprang  up  soon  after 
their  composition  will  demonstrate  the  immeasurable 
superiority  of  the  former  over  the  latter.  The  Apoc- 
ryphal Gospels  are  puerile  and  nonsensical  in  char- 
acter and  contents  by  the  side  of  the  four  Gospels 
in  the  New  Testament.  You  pass  into  a  new  atmos- 
phere, and  one  that  is  earthly  in  every  respect,  when 
you  turn  from  the  former  to  the  latter.  The  twenty- 
seven  books,  as  soon  as  the  slow  and  precarious 
methods  of  communication  between  those  parts  of 
the  Church  in  which  they  had  their  origin  permitted, 
became  the  recognized  deposit  of  the  divine  revela- 
tion, and  as  such  are  indissolubly  bound  up  in  the 
one  Book,  which  we  call  the  New  Testament. 
3  Salmon's  Introd.  to  the  New  Testament,  p.  144. 


CHAPTER   II. 

The  Gospels  —  General  Introduction. 

It  is  an  inaccuracy,  but  one  that  scarcely  can  be 
avoided,  to  speak  of  these  in  the  plural.  It  is  in 
reality  only  one  Gospel,  although  four-fold.  Justin 
Martyr  is  the  first  writer  who  makes  use  of  the  term 
**the  Gospels"  technically,  as  applied  to  the  four 
books  that  constitute  the  Gospel  record.  The  gen- 
eral signification  of  the  term  up  to  his  time  had  been 
that  of  the  message  of  salvation.  The  word  really 
means  "  good  tidings,"  having  reference  to  the  char- 
acter of  the  message  it  contained.  The  four  books 
of  the  Gospel  we  have,  do  not  pretend  to  be  com- 
plete histories  of  the  words  and  acts  of  the  Saviour. 
They  are  rather  biographical  memoirs,  which  taken 
together  constitute  the  one  Gospel.  To  be  literally 
correct  in  designating  the  various  parts  of  this  one 
Gospel,  we  should  always  say,  not  "  Matthew's  Gos- 
pel," or  ''  Mark's  Gospel,"  and  so  on,  but  "  the  Gospel 
according  to  Matthew,"  *'  the  Gospel  according  to 
Mark,"  and  so  on.  This  unity  must  always  be  borne 
in  mind,  even  though  the  common  usage  of  terms 
should  compel  us  to  be  at  times  slightly  inaccurate. 

I.   THE   NUMBER   AND   ORDER   OF  THESE   BOOKS. 

The  number  of  the  books  composing  the  Gospel 
has  always  been  four,  and  only  four.  The  closest 
examination  of  the  early  Christian  writings,  so  far  as 

[4] 


GENERAL  INTRODUCTION.  5 

they  have  been  preserved,  will  show  that  canonical 
authority  has  never  been  accorded  to  any  other  Gos- 
pels than  these  four.  There  are  a  number  of  so- 
called  Gospels  besides  these,  but  not  one  of  them 
ever  received  any  recognition  at  the  hands  of  the 
Church.  As  early  as  150  A.  D.,  Tatian  the  Syrian 
made  a  harmonic  arrangement  of  these  four  Gospels 
from  a  Syriac  translation  of  them  then  in  existence.  ^ 
Irenaeus  enters  into  an  elaborate  argument  to  prove 
that  there  were  only  four  real  Gospels.  He  speaks 
of  the  fourfoldness  of  the  Gospel,  conforming  itself 
to  the  analogy  of  the  four  quarters  of  the  globe,  the 
four  chief  winds,  and  the  four  faces  of  the  cherubim. 
*'  He  asserts  that  the  four  Gospels  are  the  four  pillars 
on  which  the  Church  rests  as  it  covers  the  whole 
earth,  and  in  this  number  four  he  recognizes  a 
special  token  of  the  Creator's  wisdom.  .  .  .  The 
acceptance  of  all  the  four  was  then  of  so  long 
standing  and  so  thoroughly  complete,  that  the  Bishop 
of  Lyons  could  allude  to  the  fourfoldness  of  the 
Gospel  as  a  thing  universally  recognized,  and  in 
consequence  of  this  very  recognition  speak  of  it  as 
a  thing  which  harmonizes  with  great  and  unchang- 
ing cosmical  arrangements."  ^ 

**  Upon  a  review  of  all  the  witnesses,  from  the 
Apostolic  Fathers  down  to  the  Canon  of  the  Laodi- 
cean Council  in  363,  and  that  of  the  third  Council  of 
Carthage  in  397,  in  both  of  which  the  four  Gospels 
are  numbered  in  the  Canon  of  Scripture,  there  can 
hardly  be  room  for  any  candid  person  to  doubt 
that   from  the    first  the  four    Gospels   were    recog- 

^  Tatian' s  Diatessaron. 

^Tischendorf's  Origin  of  the  Four  Gospels,  p.  38. 


6  THE  GOSPELS. 

nized  as  genuine  and  as  inspired  ;  that  a  sharp  line 
of  distinction  was  drawn  between  them  and  the  so- 
called  apocryphal  Gospels,  of  which  the  number  was 
very  great ;  that,  from  the  citations  of  passages,  the 
Gospels  bearing  these  four  names  were  the  same  as 
those  which  we  possess  in  our  Bibles  under  the  same 
names  ;  that  unbelievers,  like  Celsus,  did  not  deny  the 
genuineness  of  the  Gospels,  even  when  rejecting 
their  contents ;  and,  lastly,  that  heretics  thought 
that  it  was  necessary  to  plead  some  kind  of  sanction 
out  of  the  Gospels  for  their  doctrines  ;  nor  could  they 
venture  on  the  easier  path  of  an  entire  rejection,  be- 
cause the  Gospels  were  everywhere  known  to  be  gen- 
uine. As  a  matter  of  literary  history,  nothing  can 
be  better  established  than  the  genuineness  of  the 
Gospels."  ^ 

The  order  of  the  arrangement  of  these  four  books 
has  always  been  the  same  as  it  now  is  in  our  Bibles. 
The  Muratori  Canon  speaks  of  Luke  as  the  third 
Gospel,  and  John  as  the  fourth.  As  this  Canon  is 
fragmentary,  and  in  the  part  now  lost  must  have 
spoken  of  the  first  and  second  Gospels,  we  naturally 
infer  that  they  were  none  other  than  Matthew  and 
Mark  respectively. 

II.    THE   CHARACTERISTICS  OF    THESE   BOOKS. 

That  these  four  books  have  their  marked  and 
peculiar  characteristics,  is  evident  on  a  most  cursory 
reading.  As  early  a  writer  as  Irenaeus  affirms  that 
Matthew  symbolizes  the  man  ;  Mark,  theeagle;  Luke, 
the  ox ;  and  John,  the  lion.  ""'  These'ideas  were 
taken  up  by  later  writers  and  more  fully  developed. 

5 Smith's  Dictionary  of  the  Bible,  p.  ^43. 


GENERAL  INTRODUCTION.  7 

And  while  this  is  merely  a  quaint  conceit  of  Irenaeus 
and  other  writers,  the  basis  of  it  is  to  be  found  in  the 
differentiating  features  of  these  books,  which  at  an 
early  age  were  clearly  recognized  and  which  seemed 
to  call  for  some  explanation  at  the  hands  of  those 
who  accepted  them.  These  features  will  be  dwelt 
upon  respectively  as  we  study  the  books  in  their  or- 
der, and  there  is  no  occasion  to  anticipate  what  will 
naturally  be  considered  farther  on.  In  their  mem- 
oirs of  Christ,  the  four  Evangelists  were  guided  in 
the  selection  of  the  material  wrought  into  their 
records  by  the  purposes  they  had  in  view  in  writing, 
as  well  as  by  the  ultimate  purposes  of  the  inspiring 
Holy  Spirit.  Each  one  writes  from  his  own  stand- 
point, and  we  have  in  reality  four  different  pictures 
of  our  Lord,  delineated  by  four  different  artists  as 
His  wonderful  personality  appeared  to  their  respect- 
ive minds.  The  first  three  have  been  called  the 
Synoptic  Gospels,*  because  they  more  closely  re- 
semble one  another  in  their  general  features,  as  well 
as  in  the  ground  they  cover.  The  Fourth  Gospel 
stands  out  in  bold  relief  by  itself,  differentiated  from 
the  other  three  by  many  distinctive  features. 

Early  tradition  informs  us  that  Matthew  wrote 
his~Gospel  "for  the  Jews ;  Mark  for  the  Romans; 
Luke  for  the  Greeks ;  and  John  for  Christians  in 
general.  There  is  no  question  of  the  general  truth 
of  this  early  belief,  for  the  Evangelists  had  before 
their  minds  as  they  wrote  the  needs  of  these  respect- 
ive classes  of  persons.  It  must  be  remembered, 
however,  that  as  none  of  the  Epistles  were  addressed 

*Dr.  Dods  defines  this  term  as  meaning,  '*  giving  a  general  view  o£ 
tke  same  series  of  events  in  the  life  of  Christ,'* 


8  THE  GOSPELS. 

to  unbelievers,  so  none  of  the  Gospels  were  written 
for  those  who  were  not  Christians.  The  distinctive 
characteristics  of  these  books  arose  from  their  re- 
spective occasions  and  objects. 

III.    THE   ORIGIN  OF  THE  GOSPELS. 

No  more  difficult  problem  confronts  the  student 
of  the  Gospels  than  that  of  their  origin.  One  is 
struck  with  the  fact  that  between  them  there  are 
the  most  remarkable  resemblances,  and  at  the  same 
time  equally  striking  differences.  This  has  given 
rise  to  the  so-called  Synoptic  and  Johannean  prob- 
lems. We  naturally  deal  with  the  Synoptic  Gos- 
pels by  themselves,  for  the  narrative  of  the  Fourth 
Gospel  coincides  with  the  other  three  in  only  a  few 
passages.  John  in  the  main  in  his  Gospel  covers 
different  ground  from  that  of  the  other  three.  The 
most  reasonable  explanation  of  the  differences  that 
e3ast"^"^etweeh  his  and  the  other  three  Gospels  is, 
that  John  writing  last  of  all,  and  much  later  than 
the  others,  had  seen  their  Gospels,  and  purposely 
omitted  the  bulk  of  the  matter  that  they  had  already 
recorded. 

Taking  the  Synoptic  Gospels,  we  find  a  large 
amount  of  actual  agreement  in  arrangement  and  de- 
tail. "  If  we  suppose  the  histories  that  they  contain 
to  be  divided  into  sections,  in  42  of  these  all  three 
narratives  coincide,  12  more  are  given  by  Matthew 
and  Mark  only,  5  by  Mark  and  Luke  only,  and  14  by 
Matthew  and  Luke.  To  these  must  be  added  5 
peculiar  to  Matthew,  2  to  Mark,  and  9  to  Luke  ;  and 
the  enumeration  is  complete.     But  this  applies  to 


GENERAL  INTRODUCTION.  9 

general  coincidence  as  to  the  facts  narrated ;  the 
amount  of  verbal  coincidence,  that  is,  the  passages 
either  verbally  the  same,  or  coinciding  in  the  use  of 
many  of  the  same  words,  is  much  smaller."  Pro- 
fessor Norton  writes  :  "  By  far  the  larger  portion  of 
this  verbal  agreement  is  found  in  the  recital  of  the 
words  of  others,  and  particularly  of  the  words  of 
Jesus.  Thus,  in  Matthew's  Gospel,  the  passages 
verbally  coincident  with  one  or  both  of  the  other 
two  Gospels  amount  to  less  than  a  sixth  part  of  its 
contents  ;  and  of  this  about  seven  eighths  occur  in 
the  recital  of  the  words  of  others,  and  only  about 
one  eighth  in  what,  by  way  of  distinction,  I  may  call 
mere  narrative,  in  which  the  Evangelist,  speaking  in 
his  own  person,  was  unrestrained  in  the  choice  of  his 
expressions.  In  Mark,  the  proportion  of  coincident 
passages  to  the  whole  contents  of  the  Gospel  is  about 
one  sixth,  of  which  not  one  fifth  occurs  in  the  narra- 
tive. Luke  has  still  less  agreement  of  expression 
with  the  other  Evangelists.  The  passages  in  which 
it  is  found  amount  only  to  about  a  tenth  part  of  his 
Gospel,  and  but  an  inconsiderable  portion  of  it  ap- 
pears in  the  narrative  portion  —  less  than  a  twentieth 
part.  These  proportions  should  be  further  compared 
with  those  which  the  narrative  part  of  each  Gospel 
bears  to  that  in  which  the  words  of  others  are  pro- 
fessedly repeated.  Matthew's  narrative  occupies 
about  one  fourth  of  his  Gospel ;  Mark's  about  one 
half,  and  Luke's  about  one  third.  It  may  easily  be 
computed,  therefore,  that  the  proportion  of  verbal 
coincidence  found  in  the  narrative  part  of  each  Gos- 
pel, compared  with  what  exists  in  the  other  part  is 


10  THE  GOSPELS. 

about  in  the  following  ratios  :  In  Matthew  as  one  to 
somewhat  more  than  two,  in  Mark  as  one  to  four, 
and  in  Luke  as  one  to  ten."^ 

It  is  evident  from  these  words  of  Professor  Norton 
that,  while  there  is  a  vast  amount  of  remarkable 
agreement,  there  is  also  a  great  deal  of  difference 
between  them.  Westcott  says:  *'If  the  total  con- 
tents of  the  several  Gospels  be  represented  by  lOO, 
the  following  table  is  obtained  :  — 

Peculiarities.       Concordances. 

"Mark 7  93 

Matthew 42  58 

Luke 59  41 

(John 92  8)" 

From  this  table  it  will  be  seen  that  Mark  has  the 
least  amount  of  matter  peculiar  to  himself  In  fact 
there  are  only  about  24  verses  in  Mark  that  are  not 
paralleled  in  either,  or  both,  Matthew  and  Luke. 
Matthew  has  more  concordances  than  peculiarities, 
and  Luke  has  more  peculiarities  than  concordances 
The  great  question  now  is,  How  are  we  to  ac- 
count for  these  peculiarities,  as  well  as  concord- 
ances }  We  must  find  a  theory  that  will  work  both 
ways,  that  is,  that  while  accounting  for  the  coinci- 
dences, will  also  explain  the  peculiarities.  This  is, 
the  difficulty.  Many  different  theories  have  been 
propounded,  but  they  all  fail  to  satisfy  entirely  the 
conditions  that  are  met.  Three  general  theories 
suggest  themselves.  First,  the  Synoptists  depend 
on  one  another.  These  three  are  capable  of  six 
different  combinations,  namely ;  Matthew,  Mark, 
Luke;    Matthew,    Luke,    Mark;   Mark,   Luke,   Mat- 

^Nortoa's  Genuineness  of  the  Gospels,  Vol.  I.,  p.  240, 


GENERAL  INTRODUCTION,  11 

thew ;  Mark,  Matthew,  Luke ;  Luke,  Mark,  Mat- 
thew ;  Luke,  Matthew,  Mark.  Each  one  of  these 
combinations  has  had  its  advocates.  It  is  to  be 
noted  that  in  this  list  the  title  of  a  Gospel  is  sometimes 
set  down  where,  to  be  strictly  accurate,  some  form  of 
the  Gospel  which  is  supposed  to  have  preceded  the 
canonical  book  is  meant.  Now  there  is  absolutely 
no  direct  evidence  that  the  Synoptists  saw  one 
another's  works.  Luke  certainly  cannot  have  had 
in  mind  either  of  the  other  two,  when  he  refers  to 
the  earlier  attempts  to  write  the  Gospel  history. 
This  theory  "  degrades  one  or  two  Synoptists  to  the 
position  of  slavish  and  yet  arbitrary  compilers,  not 
to  say  plagiarists  ;  it  assumes  a  strange  mixture  of 
dependence  and  affected  originality  ;  it  weakens  the 
independent  value  of  their  history  ;  and  it  does  not 
account  for  the  omissions  of  most  important  matter, 
and  for  many  differences  in  common  matter."  ^^<^-^ 
ond,  the  Synoptists  are  independent  of  one  another, 
and  depend  on  older  common  sources.  This  inde- 
pendence of  these  writers  is  borne  out  by  the  fact 
that  they  frequently  differ  where  agreement  would 
most  certainly  be  expected.  Then  at  the  same  time 
there  are  the  most  striking  coincidences.  These 
latter  may  be  accounted  for  on  the  basis  of  a  com- 
mon source,  while  their  independence  may  explain 
their  divergences.  Third,  the  Synoptists  are  de- 
pendent both  on  one  another  and  on  older  sources. 
But,  if  we  reject  the  first  theory,  we  must  also  reject 
this  one,  for  the  same  arguments  will  hold  against 
the  first  part  of  this  theory  that  do  against  it. 

It    is    noticeable    that    the    resemblances    occur 
mostly,  and  as  we  would  naturally  expect,  in  the 


12  THE   GOSPELS. 

recitative  portions,  and  the  differences  in  the  narra- 
tive. Some  writers  revert  again  and  again  to  the 
statement  of  Papias,  who  affirms  that  Matthew  wrote 
the  ** oracles"  in  Hebrew.  Calling  the  "oracles"  the 
original  Matthew,  they  claim  that  it  contained  the 
discourses  of  Christ  alone  and  was  the  basis  of  all 
the  Gospels.  But  other  writers  have  proven  that 
** oracles"  as  used  by  Papias,  does  not  necessarily 
mean  only  discourses,  but  that  the  term  can  be  ap- 
plied to  narrative  as  well  as  to  recitative  portions. 
Others  seek  for  an  original  Aramaic  written  Gospel, 
which  the  Evangelists  have  translated,  and  as  inde- 
pendent translators  have  not  always  used  the  same 
words  to  express  the  original.^  In  this  way  they 
would  account  for  the  verbal  differences.  And,  in- 
deed, it  does  give  a  satisfactory  explanation  of  varia- 
tions that  are  confined  to  words.  But,  as  Professor 
Salmon  ^  well  says,  "  The  hypothesis  of  an  Aramaic 
original  does  not  suffice  to  explain  all  the  phenomena. 
For  there  are  very  many  passages  where  the  Evan- 
gelists agree  in  the  use  of  Greek  words,  which  it  is 
not  likely  could  have  been  hit  on  independently  by 
different  translators.  If  such  cases  are  to  be  ex- 
plained by  the  use  of  a  common  original,  that  origi- 
nal must  have  been  in  the  Greek  language."^ 

In  regard  to  Matthew,  it  must  be  remembered  that 
he  was  a  personal  witness  of  many  of  the  facts,  as 
well  as  a  hearer  of  many   of  the  words   of  Christ, 

6  See  Articles  of  Prof.  Marshall  in  the  Expositor  of  189 1. 

7 Salmon's  Introd.  to  the  N.  T.,  p.  173. 

*  It  is  impossible  in  the  limits  of  this  work  to  even  state  the  many 
different  theories  that  have  been  advanced.  The  reader  is  referred  to 
the  most  elaborate  treatises  on  this  subject  for  a  review  of  the  ideas  that 
have  beea  advanced. 


GENERAL  INTRODUCTION.  13 

which  he  records.  Mark,  the  companion  of  Peter, 
gives  also  practically  an  autoptic  Gospel.  Luke 
tells  us  plainly  that  his  sources  were  written  records, 
fragmentary  in  their  character,  and  the  oral  testi- 
mony of  eye  witnesses.  Then  further,  in  our  histor- 
ical studies,  we  must  not  lose  sight  of  the  supernatural 
element  in  the  composition  of  these  Gospels,  that  is, 
the  superintendence  and  inspiration  of  the  Holy 
Spirit.  The  apostolic  preaching,  as  Dr.  Schaff  says, 
''was  chiefly  historical,  a  recital  of  the  wonderful 
public  life  of  Jesus  of  Nazareth,  and  centered  in  the 
crowning  facts  of  the  crucifixion  and  resurrection. 
The  story  was  repeated  in  public  and  in  private  from 
day  to  day  and  sabbath  to  sabbath.  The  Apostles 
and  primitive  Evangelists  adhered  closely  and  rever- 
ently to  what  they  saw  and  heard  from  their  divine 
Master  and  their  disciples  faithfully  reproduced  their 
testimony."^ 

At  the  first,  the  need  of  authoritative  written 
records  did  not  exist.  The  facts  of  Christ's  life  and 
His  words  were  fresh  and  vivid  in  their  memories. 
Living  words  were  sufficient  for  the  present  needs  of 
the  believers,  but  the  Church  grew  and  soon  included 
those  who  had  no  personal  knowledge  of  those  facts 
and  words.  "  The  wide  growth  of  the  Church  fur- 
nished them  with  an  adequate  motive  for  adding  a 
written  record  to  the  testimony  of  their  living  words  ; 
and  the  very  form  of  the  Gospels  was  only  deter- 
mined by  the  experience  of  teaching.  The  work  of 
an  Evangelist  was  thus  not  the  simple  result  of 
divine  inspiration  or  of  human  thought,  but  rather 
the  complex  issue  of  both  when  applied  to  such  a 

•  History  of  the  Christian  Church,  Vol.  I.,  p.  603. 


14  THE   GOSPELS. 

selection  of  Christ's  words  and  works  as  the  varied 
phases  of  apostolic  preaching  had  shown  to  be  best 
suited  to  the  wants  of  men.  The  primary  Gospel 
was  proved,  so  to  speak,  in  life,  before  it  was  fixed  in 
writing.  Out  of  the  countless  multitude  of  Christ's 
acts,  those  were  gathered,  which  were  seen  to  have 
the  fullest  representative  significance  for  the  exhibi- 
tion of  His  divine  life.  The  oral  collection  thus 
formed  became  in  every  sense  coincident  with  the 
*  Gospel';  and  our  Gospels  are  the  permanent  com- 
pendium of  its  contents."  ^^ 

In  view  of  these  facts,  we  may  feel  confident  that 
the  oral  preaching  of  the  early  days  was  the  real 
basis  of  the  Gospels.  The  customs  and  training  of 
those  days,  when  of  books  there  were  none,  and 
manuscripts  were  unhandy,  led  to  habits  of  memo- 
rizing. The  living  words  of  Christ  were  ineffaceably 
burned  into  the  minds  of  His  followers.  The  same 
facts  were  repeated  over  and  over  again,  until  finally 
they  were  fairly  stereotyped  in  their  minds.  In  re- 
cording the  words  of  Christ,  the  Evangelists  natur- 
ally harmonize  very  closely  with  one  another.  But 
since  the  words  of  Christ  were  frequently  associated 
with  attendant  circumstances,  it  is  not  surprising 
that  differences  should  appear  in  the  narrative  por- 
tions of  the  writings,  as  this  one  thought  of  one 
circumstance  and  that  one  another.  Thus  they  were 
both  independent  and  dependent.  Their  individual 
minds,  as  well  as  the  specific  purposes  for  which 
they  wrote,  led  them  to  differences  of  expression,  as 
well  as  to  the  selection  of  different  material.  Mark, 
though   written   last  of  the  three,  represents  most 

10  Westcott's  Introd.  to  the  Study  of  the  Gospels,  p.  1^8, 


GENERAL  INTRODUCTION,  15 

clearly  the  briefest  form  of  the  early  preaching ; 
while  Matthew  and  Luke  give  the  same  in  more 
extended  form,  and  as  their  purposes  demanded. 
To  use  the  words  of  Dr.  Schaff,  "  We  conclude,  then, 
that  the  Synoptists  prepared  their  Gospels  independ- 
ently, during  the  same  period,  in  different  places, 
chiefly  from  the  living  teaching  of  the  first  disciples, 
w^hich  was  the  common  property  of  the  Church. 
Their  agreement  and  disagreement  are  not  the 
result  of  design,  but  of  the  unity,  richness,  and  va- 
riety of  the  original  story  as  received,  understood, 
digested,  and  applied  by  different  minds  to  different 
conditions  and  classes  of  hearers  and  readers."" 

"  Schaff' s  History,  Vol.  I.,  606.  For  those  who  desire  to  investigate 
this  subject  farther,  I  would  recommend  the  perusal  of  what  is  said  on 
it  by  the  following  :  Salmon's  Introd.;  Schaff's  History  of  the  Christian 
Church,  Vol.  I.,  p.  590;  Westcott's  Introd.  to  the  Gospels;  Article, 
''Gospels"  in  Smith's  Dictionary  of  the  Bible. 


CHAPTER  III. 

The  Gospels — Special  Introduction. 

We  will  now  take  up  the  study  of  the  individual 
books  composing  the  Gospel,  in  the  order  in  which 
they  stand. 

I.  THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MATTHEW. 

/.   Cattonicity. 

The  external  evidence  to  the  early  existence  of 
this  book,  and  to  its  acceptance  as  a  part  of  the 
sacred  Canon,  is  very  strong.  It  undoubtedly  be- 
gins with  the  earliest  Christian  writings.  The  so- 
called  Apostolic  Fathers,  namely  ;  Clement  of  Rome 
(96),  Barnabas  (106),  Ignatius  (115),  and  Eolycarp 
(116),  give  positive  evidence  not  only  of  their  ac- 
quaintance with  it,  but  also  of  their  acceptance  of  it, 
although  none  of  them  formally  mention  it  by  name. 
The  Epistle  to  Diognetus  (117)  uses  its  language, 
and  the  Testaments  of  the  Twelve  Patriarchs  (120) 
manifestly  borrows  from  it.  In  the  Teaching  of  the. 
Twelve  Apostles  (115)  there  are  "in  all  four  literal 
or  nearly  literal  quotations  from  Matthew,  and  about 
eighteen  references  to  Matthew."  The  Second  Epis- 
tle of  Clement  (130)  quotes  a  passage  of  it  as  Script- 
ure. Papias  (120-130)  speaks  of  Matthew  by  name, 
making  the  statement  that  ''Matthew  wrote  the  ora- 
cles in  Hebrew."     This  Papias  was  a  companion  of 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MATTHEW.  17 

Polycarp  and  a  hearer  of  the  Apostle  John.  His 
statement  warrants  the  inference  that  in  his  day 
there  was  an  authoritative  Greek  Gospel  according 
to  Matthew.  Justin  Martyr  (145)  indubitably  used 
all  four  Gospels,  for  he  speaks  of  the  ''  memoirs  of 
the  Apostles  which  are  called  Gospels."  It  is  also 
to  be  noted  in  regard  to  Justin  that  the  great  mass 
of  the  citations  he  makes  are  from  Matthew.  Tatian 
(150),  the  pupil  of  Justin  Martyr,  made  a  harmonic 
arrangement  of  the   Gospels  in  Syriac. 

There  are  also  unmistakable  references  to  and 
coincidences  with  this  Gospel  in  the  writings  of  cer- 
tain early  heretics  and  heretical  sects,  among  whom 
were  the  Simonians  (100-120),  and  Basilides  (125) 
and  Valentinus  (140).  In  the  Clementine  Homilies 
(c  150)  there  are  at  least  eighteen  references  to  pecul- 
iar and  characteristic  passages  of  Matthew.  Clau- 
dius Apollinaris  (175)  speaks  of  Matthew  by  name. 
Dionysius  of  Corinth  (148-176),  Hegesippus  (157-176), 
and  Athenagoras  (177)  in  their  writings  made  allu- 
sions to  this  book,  Dionysius  mentioning  Matthew's 
name.  It  is  universally  admitted  that  Irenseus 
(175),  Tertullian  (190),  and  Clement  of  Alexandria 
(195),  as  well  as  all  succeeding  Christian  writers, 
cite  the  First  Gospel  as  Matthew's  and  as  of  divine 
authority. 

In  all  there  are  twenty-one  witnesses  before  the 

end  of  the  second  century  to  the  existence  and  use 

of  Matthew.      And   this   testimony'  comes  from  all 

parts  of  the  Church  without  an  exception.     Of  such 

a  character  is  this  volume   of  testimony  that  it  is 

sufficient  to  establish  the  canonical  authority  of  the 

book. 

% 


18  THE   GOSPEL 

II.  Authorship. 

In  this  book  there  is  nothing  to  indicate  its  au- 
thor. "The  author  does  not  personally  come  for- 
ward, nor  does  he  give  us  any  hints  as  to  who  he 
is,  or  what  his  circumstances  are."  Tradition,  how- 
ever, unanimously  assigns  this  book  to  Matthew  the 
Apostle.  This  man  is  also  called  Levi,  the  son  of 
Alphaeus  (Mark  2  :  14).  All  three  of  the  Synoptists 
relate  the  call  of  Matthew  by  the  Saviour  in  the 
same  way,  except  that  while  Matthew  calls  himself 
Matthew,  Mark  and  Luke  call  him  Levi  (Matt.  9:9; 
Mark  2  :  14  ;  Luke  5  :  27-29).  The  attempt  has  been 
made  to  prove  that  Matthew  and  Levi  were  different 
persons,  but  the  agreement  in  language  and  contents 
between  the  passages  that  refer  to  these  names  is 
such  as  to  prove  that  they  were  but  different  names 
of  the  same  individual.  It  is  noticeable  that  while 
Mark  and  Luke  in  their  lists  of  the  Apostles  give 
the  name  of  Matthew  before  that  of  Thomas  (Mark 
3  :  18  ;  Luke  6 :  15),  Matthew  himself  gives  his  own 
name  after  it.  It  is  also  a  mark  of  the  humility  of 
Matthew  that  in  his  list  he  appends  to  his  name  the 
words  "  the  publican."  Matthew  was  sitting  at  the 
receipt  of  custom,  engaged  in  his  business  as  a  tax 
collector,  when  the  Saviour  called  upon  him  to  follow 
Him.  Some  time  after  this  call,  Matthew  made  a 
feast  for  Jesus,  at  which  a  number  of  pubHcans  and 
sinners  were  present.  No  other  mention  is  made  of 
Matthew  except  in  Acts  i  :  13,  from  which  we  learn 
that  he  still  retained  his  place  among  the  Apostles, 
and  was  with  them  in  the  upper  chamber,  waiting 


ACCORDING  TO  MATTHEW.  19 

and  praying  for  the  promised  coming  of  the  Holy 
Spirit.  As  to  his  father  Alphseus  nothing  is  known. 
He  doubtless  was  a  different  person  from  Alphaeus, 
the  father  of  James  the  less.  As  there  is  no  mention 
of  Matthew's  kinship  to  our  Lord  either  in  the  New 
Testament  or  in  tradition,  we  infer  that  there  were 
two  men  of  the  name  of  Alphseus. 

Papias  is  the  first  person  who  expressly  names 
Matthew  as  the  author  of  one  of  the  Gospels.  To 
no  other  person  is  this  book  ascribed.  His  position 
as  a  publican,  or  tax  collector,  was  one  that  brought 
him  in  contact  with  many  of  the  people.  This  office 
was  especially  hated  by  the  Jews,  and  those  who 
held  it  were  generally  regarded  as  outcasts  by  their 
countrymen,  although  Matthew  and  Zacchaeus  seem 
to  have  been  men  of  good  qualities,  and  were  not- 
able exceptions  to  the  character  of  the  men  who 
usually  held  this  office.  Matthew  must  certainly 
have  been  possessed  of  special  qualifications  for  the 
apostolic  office  to  which  the  Saviour  called  him. 
Jesus  defended  Himself  for  His  associations  with  this 
class  of  people,  by  saying  to  the  fault-finding  Phari- 
sees, "  They  that  are  whole  need  not  a  physician, 
but  they  that  are  sick.  ...  I  am  not  come  to  call 
the  righteous,  but 'sinners  to  repentance."  The  selec- 
tion of  one  of  this  class  "  implies  that  already  the 
Lord  was  turning  away  from  the  legally  righteous, 
the  Pharisees,  because  His  words  found  so  little  en- 
trance into  their  hearts,  and  was  turning  to  those 
who,  though  despised  as  publicans  and  sinners,  were 
nevertheless  ready  to  receive  the  truth.  Unable  to 
draw  the  priests  into  His  service,  He  calls  fishermen  ; 


20  THE   GOSPEL 

and  what  He  cannot  accomplish  because  of  the  un- 
belief of  Pharisees,  He  will  do  through  the  faith  of 
publicans."^ 

Tradition  busies  itself  with  Matthew's  name,  send- 
ing him  to  various  places,  such  as  Parthia,  Persia, 
and  Ethiopia.  Upon  none  of  these  traditions,  how- 
ever, can  we  positively  rely,  and  we  have  no  certain 
knowledge  of  his  movements  after  Pentecost.  He 
probably  lived  for  a  good  many  years  after  that  event, 
for  the  words  in  his  Gospel  imply  that  considerable 
time  had  elapsed  since  the  resurrection  of  our  Lord 
(28:15).  "If  the  first  feeling  on  reading  these 
meagre  particulars  be  disappointment,  the  second 
will  be  admiration  for  those  who,  doing  their  duty 
under  God  in  the  great  work  of  founding  the  Church 
on  earth,  have  passed  away  to  their  Master  in  heaven 
without  so  much  as  an  effort  to  redeem  their  names 
from  silence  and  oblivion." 

///. —  Language  in  which  Originally  Written. 

This  is  a  difficult  question,  one  on  which  prominent 
scholars  are  very  much  divided.  Papias  tells  us  that 
"  Matthew  wrote  the  oracles  in  the  Hebrew  dialect." 
Irenaeus  writes,  "  Matthew  among  the  Jews  did  also 
publish  a  Gospel  in  writing  in  their  own  language." 
Eusebius  informs  us  that  Pantsenus  was  reported  to 
have  found  in  India  copies  of  ''  the  Gospel  of  Mat- 
thew which  was  written  in  Hebrew."  Origen's  tes- 
timony is  that  "the  first  (Gospel)  was  written  by 
Matthew,  once  a  publican,  afterwards  an  Apostle  of 
Jesus  Christ,  who  delivered  it  to  the  Jewish  believers, 
composed  in  the  Hebrew  language."     Jerome's  testi- 

1  Andrew's  Life  of  Our  Lord,  p.  238. 


I 


ACCORDING  TO  MATTHEW.  21 

mony  seems  at  first  sight  to  be  final  and  to  settle 
this  matter,  for  he  says,  "  Matthew  .  .  .  first  of  all 
wrote  a  Gospel  of  Christ  in  Judea  in  the  Hebrew 
language  and  letters,  for  the  sake  of  those  of  the 
circumcision  who  believed :  who  afterwards  trans- 
lated it  into  Greek  is  uncertain.  Moreover  the  very 
Hebrew  Gospel  is  in  the  library  at  Caesarea,  which 
was  collected  with  great  care  by  Pamphilus  the 
martyr.  With  the  leave  of  the  Nazarenes  who  live 
at  Beroea  in  Syria,  and  use  that  volume,  I  took  a 
copy." 

Apparently  these  positive  statements  ought  to 
settle  this  matter.  But  we  have  no  Matthew  now 
except  in  Greek.  What  has  become  of  the  Hebrew 
original  of  which  all  these  writers  speak  so  freely } 
And  what  is  the  relation  of  this  original  Hebrew 
Matthew  to  our  Greek  Matthew  }  This  latter  ques- 
tion is  answered  by  some,  who  say  that  Matthew 
himself  before  his  death  made  a  free  Greek  transla- 
tion of  his  own  original  Hebrew  Gospel ;  while 
others  affirm  that  some  unknown  person  made  the 
translation  into  Greek,  which  soon  supplanted  the 
original  Hebrew.  Jerome  tells  us  that  "who  after- 
wards translated  it  into  Greek  is  uncertain." 

There  are,  however,  some  strong  arguments  to  be 
advanced  in  favor  of  a  Greek  original  rather  than  a 
Hebrew,  (i.)  The  .  Hebr£w__original_^^ 
many  speak  was  never  seen„by._any  oae  of  the.  w;it- 
nesses.  .  Even  Jerome,  who  professes  to  have  made  a 
translation  of  it,  in  all  probability  made  a  mistake, 
having  confounded  an  apocryphal  Gospel  called 
"  The  Nazarene  Gospel,"  or  "  The  Gospel  according 
to  the  Hebrews,"  with  the  so-called  Hebrew  original 


22  THE  GOSPEL 

of  Matthew.  **  As  time  went  on  he  certainly  be- 
came more  cautious  about  asserting,  and  usually 
quotes  it  as  *  The  Gospel  written  in  the  Hebrew  lan- 
guage which  the  Nazarenes  read,'  and  he  sometimes 
adds,  'which  is  called  by  most  the  original  of  St. 
Matthew.'"  Weiss  says,  *'  His  commentary  on  Mat- 
thew certainly  shows  that  he  was  not  acquainted  with 
a  Hebrew  original  of  Matthew,  for  he  never  makes 
use  of  it  for  purposes  of  explanation."  It  is  certainly 
curious  that  none  of  these  writers  give  absolute 
testimony  to  the  existence  of  the  Hebrew  original 
of  which  they  write.  With  them  it  is  all  hear-say 
testimony.  They  all  use  the  Greek  Matthew  as 
though  it  was  the  original.  (2.)  Our  Greek  Matthew 
is  manifestly  not  a  translation  from  the  Hebrew.  **  It 
is  now  generally  admitted  that  our  present  Gospel  of 
St.  Matthew  is  not  and  cannot  be  a  translation." 
Certain  Hebrew  (Aramaic)  names  are  given  and 
translated,  as  "  Emmanuel,  which  being  interpreted 
is,  God  with  us  "  (i  :  23) ;  *'  Eli,  Eli,  lama  sabachthani, 
that  is  to  say,  My  God,  my  God,  why  hast  thou  for- 
saken me  } "  (27  :  46) ;  "  A  place  called  Golgotha,  that 
is  to  say,  a  place  of  a  skull "  (27  :  33).  If  our  Greek 
Matthew  is  a  translation  from  the  Hebrew,  why  were 
the  above  Hebrew  words  retained  in  this  translation  } 
(3.)  There  is  a  strange  confusion  of  Matthew  with 
the  so-called  '*  Gospel  according  to  the  Hebrews,"  an 
early  apocryphal  Gospel.  That  apocryphal  Gospel 
was  similar  in  certain  respects  and  in  certain  parts  to 
bur  Matthew.  This  eventually  led  to  a  confusion  of 
names  that  was  not  at  first  noticed.  This  is  espe- 
cially noticeable   in   the   writings   of  Jerome.     This 


ACCORDING  TO  MATTHEW.  23 

confusion  probably  arose  in  the  first  place  with 
Papias.  (4.)  The  early  writers  all  usejthe^Greek 
Matthew  as  authoritative.  And  in  no  place  can  we 
fTrfd  any  traces  of  tEe  existence  of  any  Hebrew  text. 
For  these  reasons,  and  others  more  technical  that 
might  be  advanced,  we  conclude  that,  despite  the 
apparently  strong  testimony  the  other  way,  Matthew 
wrote  his  Gospel  originally^  in  Greek,  and  not  in  He- 
brew or  Aramaic.  This  seems  to  be  the  verdict  of 
an  increasing  number  of  scholars. 

IV.   The  Purpose  of  the  Gospel. 

As  each  of  the  Evangelists  evidently  had  some 
definite  purpose  in  the  composition  of  his  memoir  of 
the  life  of  our  Lord,  we  naturally  ask,  What  purpose 
did  Matthew  have  in  mind  in  the  composition  of  his 
Gospel }  The  answer  to  this  question  is  at  hand. 
From  the  earliest  days  it  has  been  held  without  any 
dissent,  that  Matthew  wrote  especially  for  Jewish 
Christians.  That  he  does  not  write  chronologically 
is  very  evident  when  we  compare  his  Gospel  with 
either  Mark  or  Luke.  Matthew  groups  sayings  and 
events.  He  does  not  write  a  history,  but  an  his- 
torical argument^  in  which  he  strives  to  confirm  the 
Jewish  Christians  in  their  belief  that  Jesus  Christ^was 
the  Messiah  of  Old  Testament  type  and  prophecy. 
Beginning  by  giving  the  legal  ancestry  of  Jesus 
through  His  reputed  father  Joseph,  he  proves  that 
He  was  the  Son  of  David,  the  Son  also  of  Abraham. 
Thus  he  gives  at  the  very  outset  the  documentary 
proof  that  Jesus  was  the  legal  heir  of  David  and  of 
the  seed  of  Abraham.     "  In   short  the  great  object 


24  THE   GOSPEL 

of  the  Apostle  was  to  prove  to  Jewish  readers,  that 
the  Messianic  prophecies  of  the  Old  Testament  re- 
ceived their  accomplishment  in  Jesus  of  Nazareth  ; 
to  demonstrate  that  Jesus  had  shown  Himself  by  His 
doctrine  and  His  deeds  to  be  the  seed  of  David,  the 
Messiah  long  expected  by  the  Jewish  nation."^ 

In  the  line  of  this  purpose,  the  Evangelist  care- 
fully notes  some  of  the  prophecies  that  had  been 
fulfilled  in  the  case  of  Jesus.  Thus  Jesus  was  born 
of  a  virgin  (i  :  23),  as  Isaiah  had  foretold.  His  birth 
took  place  at  Bethlehem  (2  :  5-6)  in  accordance  with 
Micah's  words.  Persecutions  arose  so  that  His  par- 
ents were  driven  into  Egypt,  and  thus  Hosea's 
prophecy  that  "out  of  Egypt  have  I  called  my 
son,"  was  fulfilled  (2  :  15).  Christ  dwelt  in  Nazareth 
"that  it  might  be  fulfilled  which  was  spoken  by  the 
prophets,  He  shall  be  called  a  Nazarene "  (2:23). 
He  had  a  forerunner  as  Isaiah  had  predicted  (3  :  3) 
Jesus  left  Nazareth  and  dwelt  in  Capernaum  in  ac- 
cordance with  the  words  of  Isaiah  (4  :  13-16).  Isaiah 
had  also  said,  "  Himself  took  our  infirmities  and  bare 
our  sicknesses,"  and  consequently  Christ  was  found 
healing  the  sick  and  doing  deeds  of  mercy  wher- 
ever He  went  (8  :  17).  And  still  another  of  the 
same  prophet's  words  is  claimed  to  have  been  ful- 
filled in  Christ  (12:15-21).  His  parabolic  teaching 
was  in  harmony  with  prophecy  (13  :  14,  35).  As 
Zechariah  had  prophesied,  Christ  came  into  Jeru- 
salem sitting  upon  an  ass  and  a  colt  the  foal  of  an 
ass  (21  :  5).  Jesus  was  betrayed,  as  it  was  written  of 
Him  (26 :  24).  His  capture  in  the  garden  of  Geth- 
semane  was  accomplished  "that  the  scripture  of  the 

» Davidson's  Introd.  to  the  N.  T.,  ist  Ed.,  p.  3. 


ACCORDING  TO  MATTHEW.  25 

prophets  might  be  fulfilled"  (26:56).  And  the  pot- 
ter's field  was  purchased  with  the  blood  money,  as 
Jeremiah  the  prophet  had  said  (27  :  9). 

That  those  for  whose  instruction  and  benefit  Mat- 
thew primarily  wrote  were  Jews^  is  thus  borne  out  by 
the  manner  in  which  the  Old  Testament  is  used. 
The  general  Jewish  cast  of  the  matter  is  also  in  the 
same  direction.  There  is  a  thorough  acquaintance 
with  Jewish  customs  manifested,  that  the  writer  as- 
sumes to  be  in  common  between  himself  and  those 
for  whom  he  wrote.  And  since  the  author  and  his 
readers  occupied  common  ground,  he  does  not  pre- 
tend to  explain  ceremonial  terms  and  customs,  as 
the  other  Evangelists  feel  compelled  to  do. 

From  all  this  it  is  evident  that  the  author  wrote 
his  Gospel  with  special  reference  to  the  needs  of  his 
fellow  Jewish  Christians,  and  to  confirm  them  in 
the  1  r^falth' tHat'  Tesus  C h r i s t  was  the  Messiah  of  Old 


Testament  type  and  prophecy  and  promise. 
V,     The  Contents  of  this  Gospel. 

I.  The  Genealogical  Table,      i  :  1-17. 
II.   The  Birth  and  Infancy  of  Jesus,     i  :  18-2  :  23. 

III.  Circumstances     preparatory    to    His    Public 

Ministry.     3  :  1-4  :  11. 

IV.  The  Galilean  Ministry.     4  :  12-18  :  35. 

V.  The  Journey  to  Jerusalem.     19  :  1-20 :  34. 
VI.  The    Residence     in     and     about    Jerusalem. 

21  :  1-25  146. 
VII.  The   last   Passover,    including   the    Betrayal, 
the  Denial,  the  Trial,  and   the    Crucifixion. 
26  :  1-27  :  66. 
VIII.  The  Resurrection.     28  :  1-20. 


26  THE   GOSPEL 

VI.  The  Date  and  Place  of  Composition. 

It  is  impossible  to  determine  exactly  the  date  of 
the  composition  of  this  Gospel,  and  we  can  only- 
hope  to  approximate  it.  The  testimony  of  the  early 
Church  is  that  Matthew  wrote  his  Gospel  before  the 
other  Evangelists  composed  theirs.  This  testimony 
is  so  persistent  and  unanimous  that  it  ought  to  have 
some  weight  in  deciding  this  question.  That  it  was 
written  before  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem  and  the 
temple,  is  evident.  On  the  other  hand,  it  is  also  cer- 
tain that  considerable  time  must  have  elapsed  be- 
tween certain  events  and  the  description  of  them  by 
Matthew  (27:7-8;  28:15).  Luke  very  probably 
wrote  his  Gospel  during  the  Caesarean  imprisonment 
of  Paul,  that  is,  from  58-60  A.  D.  Irenaeus  informs 
us  that  this  Gospel  was  written  while  Peter  and 
Paul  were  founding  the  church  at  Rome.  But  it  is 
highly  improbable  that  Peter  was  in  Rome  before 
the  year  6%  A.  D.,  and  consequently  we  cannot  ac- 
cept the  statement  of  Irenc-eus  in  this  matter.  Now 
if  this  Gospel  was  written  before  Luke,  it  must  have 
been  written  some  time  before  58  A.  D.  Some  have 
placed  the  time  of  its  composition  as  early  as  34  A.  D., 
but  that  is  unquestionably  too  early.  We  are  doubt- 
less correct  in  dating  it  between  50  A.  D._and  58  A.  D. 

The  place  of  composition  was  evidently  Judea,  for 
such  is  the  uniform  testimony  of  antiquity,  and 
everything  in  the  book  itself  harmonizes  with  this. 
Whether  it  was  written  at  Jerusalem  cannot  cer- 
tainly be  known,  although  it  is  generally  supposed 
that  it  was  composed  in  the  holy  city.  By  some  it 
has  been  thought  very  probable  that  it  was  written 


ACCORDING  TO  MATTHEW.  ^7 

by  Matthew  as  he  was   about  to   leave  the  city  of 
Jerusalem  for  some  point  outside  of  Judea. 

VIL    The  Peculiarities  of  this  Gospel, 

The  peculiarities  of  Matthew  are  very  marked. 
One  noticeable  feature  is  the  frequency  with  which 
the  Old  Testament  is  quoted  by  him,  there  being  no 
less  than  sixty-five  passages  that  refer  to  it,  of  which 
forty-three  are  verbal  citations.  Christ  is  called  ''the 
Son  of  David"  eight  times.  The  phrase  "kingdom 
of  heaven "  is  used  in  thirty-three  different  places, 
while  the  other  Evangelists  uniformly  say  **  kingdom 
of  God."  God  is  called  the  '* heavenly  Father"  six 
times,  and  the  '*  Father  in  heaven"  sixteen  times. 
There  are  some  seventy  words  used  by  Matthew 
that  are  peculiar  to  himself,  being  found  nowhere 
else  in  the  New  Testament.  The  indefinite  particle 
of  transition  (tote)  is  used  by  him  ninety  times, 
while  Mark  uses  it  only  six  times,  and  Luke  fourteen 
times. 

''The  symbolism  is  Jewish.  Not  to  speak  of 
other  examples,  the  symbolism  in  number  pervades 
the  Gospel.  Seven,  ten,  twelve,  with  their  multiples 
repeatedly  appear.  The  genealogies  are  arranged  in 
three  fourteens.  There  are  fourteen  parables  divided 
by  place  and  purpose  into  two  sevens.  There  are 
twenty  miracles  separated  in  like  manner  into  two 
tens.  The  number  seven  generally  divides  itself  into 
four  and  three,  the  human  and  the  divine.  In  the 
Sermon  on  the  Mount,  the  Christian  character  is 
sketched  in  seven  beatitudes  (5  : 1-9).  Of  these  the 
first  four  are  exclusively  human  —  they  are  states 
which  Christ  cannot  share  ;   the  last  three  express 


28  THE   GOSPEL 

emotions  and  conduct  which  belong  to  God  as  well 
as  to  man.  In  the  thirteenth  chapter  seven  parables 
present  the  kingdom  of  heaven  in  various  relations. 
The  first  four  are  from  the  human  side,  accidental, 
temporary,  varying — the  kingdom  in  its  historical 
development,  as  man  beholds  it ;  the  last  three  are 
inherent,  essential  —  the  kingdom  as  seen  by  Christ. 
The  Lord's  prayer  has  seven  petitions  ;  the  first 
three  relating  to  God,  co-ordinate,  coequal ;  the 
last  four  relating  to  man,  joined  by  particles  of  se- 
quence."^ 

This  has  been  called  the  '*  kingly  Gospel,"  for  it 
is  the  Gospel  that  presents  the  Messianic  King.  Its 
teaching,  for  it  is  eminently  didactic,  revolves  around 
the  kingship  of  Christ.  Mark  in  his  Gospel  deals 
more  with  the  facts  and  incidents  of  Christ's  life, 
but  Matthew  emphasizes  His  teaching.  Matthew 
portrays  Christ  "  as  the  King  who  has  come  to  the 
eternal  throne  of  His  father  David."  And  it  is  fit- 
ting that  this  Gospel  should  come  first,  as  the  true 
link  that  connects  the  Old  Testament  with  the  New. 
"The  long  and  chequered  history  related  in  the  Old 
Testament  finds  its  consummation  and  significance 
in  the  life  of  Jesus."  Very  fittingly,  then,  does  this 
kingly  Gospel  stand  first  in  the  New  Testament  as 
its  bond  of  union  with  the  Old  Testament. 

II.   THE   GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO   MARK. 
/.    Canonicity. 
Owing  to  the  fact  that  this  Gospel  contains  com- 
paratively  little  distinctive  matter,   we  do  not  find 
many  quotations  from  it  in  the  early  Christian  writ- 

3  Lectures  on  the  N.  T.  (Amer.  Tract  Soc).  Dr.  Weston  on 
Matthew. 


ACCORDING  TO  MARK.  29 

ings.  But  while  this  is  true  in  general,  we  do  not 
lack  for  sufficient  witnesses  to  establish  its  right  to 
a  place  in  the  New  Testament  Canon.  Clement  of 
Rome  (96)  directly  quotes  Mark  7  :  6.*  In  Eusebius' 
history  we  have  a  quotation  from  the  writings  of 
Papias  (120-130),  in  which  he  informs  us  that  Mark 
as  ''the  interpreter  of  Peter  wrote  exactly  whatever 
he  remembered."  There  is  no  doubt  that  Papias  in 
these  words  refers  to  our  canonical  Mark,  for  no 
other  book  of  Mark's  was  known  to  antiquity.  In 
regard  to  Justin  Martyr  (145)  ''all  doubt  of  his  ac- 
quaintance with  it  is  excluded  by  the  account  of  the 
naming  of  Zebedee's  sons  (Mark  3  :  16  fiQ,  which  is 
expressly  traced  back  to  the  Memoirs  of  Peter,  i.  e. 
to  the  Gospel  of  Mark."^  Extant  fragments  from 
the  writings  of  Ptolemaeus  (165)  conclusively  prove 
that  he  used  Mark.  The  Muratori  Canon  (i/o)  in 
its  present  fragmentary  condition  begins  abruptly, 
.  .  .  '' those  things  at  which  he  was  present  he  placed 
thus.  The  third  book  of  the  Gospel,  that  according 
to  Luke.  .  .  .  The  fourth  Gospel  is  that  of  John." 
It  certainly  is  not  unreasonable  to  infer  that  the  lost 
part,  referring  to  the  first  and  second  books  of  the 
Gospel,  named  Matthew  and  Mark  as  such.  We  can 
justly  claim  this  Canon  as  a  witness  to  the  existence 
of  Mark  as  well  as  of  Matthew. 

The  great  writers  of  the  latter  part  of  the  second 
century,  Irenaeus,  Tertullian,  and  Clement  of  Alex- 
andria, discuss  the  relation  of  Mark  to  Peter,  and 
they  do  this  in  a  way  that  shows  that  this  Gospel 
was  received  in  all  quarters  of  the  Church.  Up  to 
the  latter  part  of  the  second  century  we  have  at  least 

*  Clement  of  Rome.  15.2. 

5  Weiss'  Manual  of  Introd.  to  the  N.  T.,  p.  59. 


30  THE   GOSPEL 

ten  Important  witnesses  to  the  existence  and  use  of 
Mark  as  authoritative.  These  witnesses  are  from  all 
parts  of  the  Church,  and  are  sufficient  to  establish 
the  canonical  authority  of  the  book. 

//.  Authorship. 

The  book  itself  makes  no  claim  as  to  its  author- 
ship, but  the  early  Church  without  a  dissenting 
voTceaffii-rried'thaf  "Mark  was  its  author.  The  origi- 
riar Jewish  name  of  the  author  was  John,  to  which 
was  added  afterwards  the  Roman  name  Marcus,  or 
Mark.  In  the  Acts  (12:12,  25;  15:37)  we  read, 
"John,  whose  surname  was  Mark."  He  is  called 
John  (Acts  13:  13),  and  Mark  (Acts  15  :39;  2  Tim. 
4:11),  and  Marcus  (Col.  4:10;  Philem.  24;  i  Pet. 
5  :  13).  It  is  evident  that  the  Jewish  name  John  was 
ere  long  discarded,  for  in  the  Epistles  he  always 
appears  as  Mark. 

Mark  was  a  Jew.  His  mother,  whose  name  was 
Mary,  owned  a  house  in  Jerusalem,  indicating  a  meas- 
ure of  wealth  in  the  family  (Acts  12:12).  Barnabas, 
the  companion  of  Paul  on  the  first  missionary  jour- 
ney, was  the  cousin  of  Mark^  (Col.  4:10,  R.  v.). 
The  Apostle  Peter  calls  Mark  his  son  (i  Pet.  5  :  13), 
but  he  unquestionably  does  so  in  the  same  sense  that 
Paul  calls  Timothy  his  son.  When  Peter  was  cast 
into  prison  by  Herod  Agrippa  (44  A.  D.),  the  believ- 
ers were  gathered  at  the  house  of  Mark's  mother 
praying  for  the  Apostle's  deliverance.  And  when 
he  was  released  by  the  angel,  Peter  naturally  turned 
to  that  rendezvous  of  the  Christians.  Evidently 
there  was  a  degree  of  familiarity  existing  between 

^  Incorrectly  rendered  "sister's  son  "  in  the  A,  V. 


ACCORDING  TO  MARK.  31 

the  two  families.  It  was  through  the  influence  of 
Peter  that  Mark  was  brought  to  Christ,  thus  becom- 
ing Peter's  spiritual  son. 

It  is  this  Gospel  that  records  the  fact  that  at  the 
time  of  the  arrest  of  Christ,  "  there  followed  him  a 
certain  young  man,  having  a  linen  cloth  cast  about 
his  naked  body  ;  and  the  young  men  laid  hold  on 
him  :  and  he  left  the  linen  cloth,  and  fled  from  them 
naked"  (14:51-52).  It  has  been  inferred  that  this 
nameless  young  man  was  none  other  than  the  author 
of  this  Gospel.  ''  The  most  probable  view  is  that 
St.  Mark  suppressed  his  own  name,  whilst  telling  a 
story  which  he  had  the  best  means  of  knowing. 
Awakened  out  of  sleep,  or  just  preparing  for  it  in 
some  house  in  the  valley  of  Kedron,  he  comes  out 
to  see  the  seizure  of  the  betrayed  Teacher,  known  to 
him  and  in  some  degree  beloved  already.  He  is  so 
deeply  interested  in  His  fate  that  he  follows  Him 
even  in  his  linen  robe.  His  demeanor  is  such  that 
some  of  the  crowd  are  about  to  arrest  him  ;  then, 
fear  overcoming  shame,  he  leaves  his  garment  in 
their  hands  and  flees.  We  can  only  say  that  if  the 
name  of  Mark  is  supplied,  the  narrative  receives  its 
most  probable  explanation."'' 

It  was  through  his  cousin  Barnabas  that  Mark 
was  brought  in  contact  with  Paul.  And  when  Paul 
and  Barnabas  were  returning  to  Antioch,  having 
delivered  the  offering  of  the  Antiochene  Christians 
to  the  church  at  Jerusalem,  Mark  accompanied  them 
(Acts  12  :  25).  Not  long  afterwards  Paul  and  Barna- 
bas went  forth  on  their  first  missionary  journey,  in 
accordance  with  divine  direction,  Mark  accompany- 
7  Article  *'  Mark  "  in  Smith's  Dictionary  of  the  Bible, 


32  THE   GOSPEL 

ing  them  as  their  "minister."  In  this  association 
with  these  two  great  missionaries  Mark's  office 
probably  had  reference  to  temporal  rather  than 
spiritual  duties.  It  may  have  been  his  business  to 
provide  for  the  needs  of  the  others,  arranging  all 
matters  connected  with  their  traveling  and  such 
like.  But  when  the  band  came  to  Perga  in  Pam- 
phylia,  Mark  left  them  and  returned  to  Jerusalem. 
This  departure  of  Mark  must  have  caused  some 
little  trouble  and  annoyance  to  the  missionaries. 
And  when  the  same  two  workers  were  about  to  go 
forth  on  their  second  missionary  journey,  **  Barna- 
bas determined  to  take  with  them  John,  whose  sur- 
name was  Mark.  But  Paul  thought  not  good  to 
take  him  with  them,  who  had  departed  from  them 
from  Pamphylia,  and  went  not  with  them  to  the 
work."  And  so  sharp  did  this  contention  become 
that  the  missionaries  parted  company,  each  one 
taking  the  man  of  his  own  choice. 

What  was  the  cause  of  this  defection  of  Mark } 
Two  different  answers  have  been  suggested  for  this 
question.  It  has  been  noted  that  Mark's  family  lived 
in  comfortable  circumstances  in  Jerusalem.  When 
Mark  accompanied  Paul  and  Barnabas,  he  had  to 
leave  the  comforts  of  that  home  behind  him  ;  but  in 
his  new  zeal  he  may  not  have  thought  much  of  the 
sacrifice  he  was  making.  And  with  no  less  enthu- 
siasm he  must  have  gone  forth  with  the  missionaries 
on  their  first  journey,  probably  also  feeling  highly 
honored  that  he  was  the  person  chosen  to  accompany 
them  as  their  minister.  But  the  **  romance  of  mis- 
sions "  soon  wore  off.  He  found  the  life  of  the  mis- 
sionary attended  with  discomfort  and  danger,  and  so 


ACCORDING  TO  MARK.  33 

by  the  time  he  had  reached  Perga  he  had  had  enough 
of  it.  Homesickness  overcame  him,  and  he  went 
home  to  Jerusalem.  The  other  explanation  that  has 
been  offered  is  as  follows  :  Mark  was  not  prepared  to 
go  the  lengths  in  preaching  among  the  Gentiles  that 
Paul  and  Barnabas  advocated.  Tinctured  with 
Judaic-Christian  feelings,  he  could  not  accept  and 
endorse  the  idea  of  a  universal  offer  of  salvation 
conditioned  on  faith  alone.  Which  of  these  ideas 
is  correct  cannot  be  absolutely  decided.  It  is 
probable  that  the  truth  lies  in  a  combination  of 
the   two. 

After  this  incident,  we  do  not  meet  the  name  of 
Mark  in  the  Acts  again,  but  both  Paul  and  Peter 
refer  to  him  afterwards  in  some  of  their  letters. 
From  the  reference  to  him  by  Paul,  it  appears  that 
he  had  in  some  way  won  back  the  regard  and  confi- 
dence of  that  great  Apostle,  and  had  become  profit- 
able to  him  for  the  ministry  (2  Tim.  4:  11).  Mark 
was  with  Paul  during  a  part  of  the  first  Roman  im- 
prisonment (Col.  4  :  10 ;  Philemon  24).  When  the 
Apostle  wrote  his  Epistle  to  the  Colossians  in  62  A.  D., 
Mark  was  planning  for  a  journey  to  Asia  Minor,  for 
Paul  writes,  **  If  he  come  unto  you  receive  him." 
And  when  Paul  wrote  his  Second  Epistle  to  Timothy 
in  67  A.  D.,  Mark  was  in  Asia  Minor  not  far  from 
Timothy,  for  Paul  enjoins  Timothy,  "  Take  Mark,  and 
bring  him  with  thee :  for  he  is  profitable  to  me  for 
the  ministry," 

Turning  now  to  Peter,  we  find  that  Mark  was  with 

him  in  64  A.  D.,  when  he  wrote  his  First  Epistle  from 

Babylon.     It  is  evident  that  Mark,  having  gone  to 

Asia  Minor  as  he  contemplated  in  62  A.  D.,  continued 

8 


34  THE   GOSPEL 

his  journey  and  joined  Peter  at  Babylon.  When  Paul 
wrote  his  Second  Epistle  to  Timothy,  Mark  had  re- 
turned to  Asia  Minor  and  was  somewhere  in  the 
neighborhood  of  Ephesus,  hence  Paul's  injunction  to 
Timothy  to  bring  him  with  him  to  Rome.  There  is 
no  possibility  of  telling  how  much  of  the  time  be- 
tween 63  and  67  A.  D.  was  spent  by  Mark  in  the 
company  of  Peter. 

Tradition  busies  itself  with  the  name  of  Mark,  but 
of  all  it  reports  we  cannot  tell  what  to  accept  and 
what  to  reject.  Among  other  things  it  is  said  that 
Mark  was  sent  by  Peter  to  Egypt.  Jerome  tells  us 
that  he  founded  the  church  at  Alexandria,  Egypt, 
and  afterwards  became  its  bishop.  His  death  was  a 
violent  one,  and  his  tomb  became  an  object  of  ven- 
eration. It  is  said  also  that  in  the  year  815  A.  D., 
some  Venetian  sailors  stole  his  relics,  and  took  them 
to  Venice,  where  they  were  buried  under  the  site  of 
the  stately  cathedral  that  bears  the  name  of  Mark, 
and  thus  he  became  the  patron  saint  of  the  Venetian 
Republic. 

///.    The  Purpose  of  this  Gospel. 

The  purpose  of  this  Evangelist  was  evidently  to 
portray  the  life  of  Christ  on  its  human  side.  In 
accordance  with  this  purpose  he  deals  rather  with 
the  facts  of  the  life  of  the  Saviour  than  with  His 
teachings.  This  memoir  of  Jesus  tells  us  **how  God 
anointed  Jesus  of  Nazareth  with  the  Holy  Ghost  and 
with  power  :  who  went  about  doing  good,  and  heal- 
ing all  that  were  oppressed  of  the  devil ;  for  God  was 
with  Him  "  (Acts  10  :  38).  ''  The  man  Christ  Jesus-is 
the  sole  and  unchanging  theme  of  the  whole  book." 


ACCORDING  TO  MARIC,  35 

And  if  2  Peter  1:15  was  the  promise  of  a  Gospel 
record,  and  if  this  Gospel  was  the  fulfillment  of  that 
promise,  we  naturally  look  for  a  setting  forth  of  the 
facts  of  the  Gospel  history  in  it.  And  this  is  exactly 
what  we  do  find  in  it. 

As  to  the  persons  for  whom  it  was  primarily  in- 
tended, we  are  safe  in  affirming  that  they  were 
Gentiles  and  not  Jews.  Jewish  rites  and  ceremonies 
are  always  explained  whenever  the  author  refers  to 
them.  And  this  is  also  true  of  the  locations  that  are 
described,  for  they  are  specified  in  such  a  way  that  it  is 
evident  that  the  writer  has  in  mind  persons  who  were 
outside  of  Judea,  and  who  were  not  personally  ac- 
quainted with  that  country.  Tradition  affirms  that 
Mark  wrjote_his_ Gospel  for  the  Romans.  There  is 
little  reason  for  doubting  that  Mark  wrote  this 
Gospel  in  Rome.  It  was  natural  that  he  should  be 
influenced  largely  by  the  needs  of  the  type  of  Chris- 
tians by  whom  he  was  surrounded.  In  its  brief, 
rapid,  and  concise  statement  of  the  facts  of  the  life 
of  Christ,  it  was  peculiarly  adapted  to  the  Roman 
character.  The  Roman  influence  on  this  Gospel  is 
manifest  in  the  presence  in  it  of  Latin  words.  We 
may  conclude,  then,  that  the  tradition  that  it  was 
intended  in  the  first  place  for  Roman  Christians  is 
correct,  although  the  Evangelist  may  have  also  in- 
tended it  for  a  wider  sphere  than  that,  writing  a 
Gospel  of  facts  for  men  of  action  wherever  found. 
There  is  no  question  that  from  the  time  of  the  burn- 
ing of  the  city  of  Rome  in  64  A.  D.,  the  Christians  of 
that  city  had  been  scattered  far  and  wide  by  the 
fierce  persecutions  of  Nero.  This  would  naturally 
widen  the  field  for  this  Gospel. 


36  THE  GOSPEL 

IV.  Contents  of  this  Gospel. 

I.   The  work  of  John  the    Baptist,  preparatory  to 

Christ's  Public  Ministry,     i  :  1-13. 
II.   The  Galilean  Ministry  with   Capernaum  as  the 
center  of  its  operations,     i  :  14-9  :  50. 

III.  The  last  journey  to  Jerusalem.     10  :  1-52. 

IV.  The    closing    scenes    of    Christ's    life.       11  :i- 

16:8. 
V.  Later  addition  by  another   hand   than    Mark's. 
16  :9-20. 

V.   Date  and  Place  of  Composition. 

Rome  was  unquestionably  the  place  of  the  com- 
position of  this  Gospel.  The  date  is  not  quite  so 
easily  settled.  It  is  certain  that  it  was  not  written 
before  the  Epistle  to  the  Colossians,  for  otherwise 
Paul  would  not  have  referred  to  Mark  simply  as  the 
cousin  of  Barnabas  (Col.  4  :  10).  On  the  other  hand, 
it  must  have  been  written  before  the  destruction  of 
Jerusalem  (Mark  13  :  13  ff.).  This  places  the  time  of 
its  composition  sometime  between  62  and  70  A.  D. 

Mark  is  called  *'  the  disciple  and  interpreter  of 
Peter."  We  are  informed  by  Clement  of  Alexandria 
that  the  Christians  of  Rome  having  heard  the  preach- 
ing of  Peter,  besought  Mark  to  write  out  the  things 
that  were  prominent  in  Peter's  preaching.  Irenseus 
tells  us  that  '*  Matthew  wrote  a  Gospel  while  Peter 
and  Paul  were  preaching  the  gospel  at  Rome  and 
founding  a  church  there.  And  after  their  decease 
(exodus),  Mark,  the  disciple  and  interpreter  of  Peter, 
delivered  to  us  in  writing  the  things  that  had  been 
preached  by  Peter."     From  this  statement,  as  well  as 


ACCORDING  TO  MARK.  37 

from  a  careful  comparison  of  this  Gospel  with  the 
recorded  speeches  and  the  writings  of  Peter,  it  is 
evident  that  this  Gospel  does  contain  the  facts  in  the 
life  of  the  Saviour  that  were  made  especially  promi- 
nent by  Peter. 

In  2  Peter  i  :  15  we  read,  "Moreover  I  will  en- 
deavor that  ye  may  be  able  after  my  decease  (exo- 
dus) to  have  these  things  always  in  remembrance." 
Here  is  a  promise  by  Peter,  writes  Dr.  Warfield, 
'*  that  he  will  see  to  it  that  his  readers  shall  be  in  a 
position  after  his  death  to  have  his  teachings  always 
in  remembrance,  and  in  this  he  has  especial  reference 
to  the  facts  of  Christ's  life,  witnessed  to  by  him,  as  is 
proved  by  the  purpose  which  he  expresses  for  so 
arranging,  namely,  that  they  may  know  that  they 
have  not  followed  cunningly  devised  fables,  but  facts 
autoptically  witnessed.  Surely  this  seems  to  promise 
a  Gospel."  It  is  interesting  to  note  that  Peter  speaks 
of  his  decease  (Gk.  exodus),  after  which  this  was  to 
be  done  ;  while  Irenseus  uses  the  same  word  in  this 
peculiar  sense  of  death,  and  tells  us  that  after  Peter's 
and  Paul's  decease  (exodus),  Mark  delivered,  etc. 
This  can  be  no  inadvertent  coincidence.  Irenaeus 
had  Peter's  word  and  promise  before  him  as  he 
wrote,  hence  he  uses  this  word  in  this  peculiar  sense.* 

8  In  the  account  of  the  Transfiguration  as  given  in  Luke  9  :  28  ff., 
we  are  informed  that  when  Moses  and  Elijah  talked  with  Jesus,  they 
"spake  of  His  decease  which  He  should  accomplish  at  Jerusalem." 
Here  the  word  "exodus"  is  used,  and  it  was  doubtless  from  this  place 
Peter  got  this  word,  for  immediately  afterwards  he  speaks  of  the  Trans- 
figuration (2  Peter  i  :  16  f ).  Peter  wrote  with  that  scene  before  him, 
using  the  word  he  heard  then  for  death.  So  Irenseus  in  all  probability 
had  in  mind  this  passage  of  Peter  when  he  spoke  of  the  circumstances 
under  which  Mark  wrote  his  Gospel. 


38  THE  GOSPEL 

If  this  idea  is  correct,  then,  the  date  of  this  Gos- 
pel must  be  placed  after  that  of  Second  Peter.  It  is 
evident  that  Peter,  when  he  wrote  his  Second  Epistle 
in  68  A.  D.,  was  looking  forward  to  death  in  a  short 
time.  Mark  wrote  his  Gospel  accordingly  soon 
afterwards,  and  consequently  we  date  it  during  the 
Summer  of  68  A.  D. 

VI.   The  Connection  between  Mark  and  Peter. 

It  has  already  been  noted  that  Mark  was  called 
"the  disciple  and  interpreter  of  Peter."  *' The  char- 
acter of  the  Gospel  itself  coincides  with  the  testi- 
mony of  antiquity,  in  inferring  a  connection  between 
the  writer  and  Peter.  Thus  we  find  especial  refer- 
ence to  the  latter,  by  the  insertion  of  his  name 
where  no  reason  for  it  can  be  discovered  in  the 
event  related,  and  where  no  light  is  thrown  by  it 
on  the  event  itself  His  presence  is  marked  in  the 
Gospel,  where  the  recording  of  it  is  apparently  of 
no  importance,  and  might  have  been  omitted  with 
equal  propriety.  Doubtless  this  peculiarity  was 
owing  to  a  desire,  on  the  part  of  Mark,  to  bring  out 
the  Apostle  into  preeminence  as  his  authority,  while 
it  evinces  an  intimate  knowledge  of  the  circum- 
stances respecting  Peter,  unnoticed  by  the  other 
Evangelists.  Examples  of  this  are  furnished  by 
chap.  I  :  36,  where  Simon  is  mentioned  as  being  with 
Jesus,  a  circumstance  omitted  by  Luke.  In  the  ac- 
count of  the  raising  of  Jairus'  daughter,  Peter,  John, 
and  James  are  mentioned  as  the  only  witnesses  of 
the  occurrence,  whereas  in  Matthew's  Gospel  there 
is  no  allusion  to  them  (5  :  37)."^     Other  examples  of 

*  Davidson's  Introd.  ist  Ed.,  Vol.  I.,  p.  145. 


ACCORDING  TO  MARK,  39 

this  same  feature  may  be  found  in  ii  120-26 ;  13  :  3  ; 

16:7. 

On  the  other  hand  it  should  be  noted  that  Mark 
omits  several  references  to  Peter  given  by  the  other 
Evangelists.  The  promise  made  to  the  Apostles  in 
answer  to  the  question  of  Peter  is  unnoticed  (Matt. 
19 :  28).  And  although  he  was  one  of  the  disciples 
sent  to  prepare  for  the  observance  of  the  Passover, 
his  name  is  not  given  by  Mark.  The  intensity  of 
Peter's  repentance  is  expressed  by  the  word  *'  bit- 
terly" in  Matthew  and  Luke,  but  this  word  is 
omitted  by  Mark.  **  It  has  been  sought  to  account 
for  these  omissions  on  the  ground  of  humility  ;  but 
some  may  think  that  this  cannot  be  the  clew  in  all 
places.  But  what  we  generalize  from  these  passages 
is,  that  the  name  of  Peter  is  peculiarly  dealt  with, 
added  here,  and  there  withdrawn,  which  would  be 
explained  if  the  writer  had  special  information  about 
Peter.  On  the  whole  the  internal  evidence  inclines 
us  to  accept  the  account  that  this  inspired  Gospel 
has  some  connection  with  Peter,  and  records  more 
exactly  the  preaching  which  he,  guided  by  the  Spirit 
of  God,  uttered  for  the  instruction  of  the  world." 

VII.    The  Integrity  of  this  Gospel. 

A  very  interesting  question  comes  up  in  regard  to 
the  last  twelve  verses  of  the  last  chapter.  Did  Mark 
write  these  verses.?  The  bulk  of  scholarships*  has 
decided  this  question  in  the  negative.  They  "are 
generally  regarded  as  an  appendix  by  an  unknown 
hand.     The  best  textual  critics  reject  them.     They 

I*' Tregelles,  Meyer,  Tischendorf,  Westcott  and  Hort,  Warfield  and 
others. 


40  THE  GOSPEL 

are  not  found  in  the  Sinaitic  and  Vatican  Manu- 
scripts. The  internal  evidence  is  strongly  against 
their  reception.  The  repetition  of '  early '  (ver.  9,  cf.  vr. 
2)  is  needless  ;  the  word  for  '  week '  is  never  elsewhere 
used  by  Mark.  The  addition  '  out  of  whom  He  cast 
seven  devils,'  to  Mary  Magdalene's  name  is  quite  un- 
accountable, as  she  has  been  already  named  in  this 
chapter  as  well  as  previously  in  the  Gospel;  'the 
Lord  '  occurs  twice  in  these  verses,  never  elsewhere 
in  Mark  ;  other  words  and  constructions  occurring  in 
this  passage  are  unknown  to  Mark.  The  promises 
made  to  believers  and  the  general  character  of  the 
paragraph  are  suspicious." 

It  is  true  that  to  end  this  Gospel  at  16:8  is  very 
abrupt,  but  this  disputed  section  does  not  remedy 
this  abruptness  very  much.  The  Revisers  of  the 
New  Testament  show  plainly  that  they  regarded  the 
passage  with  suspicion,  for  they  have  separated  it 
somewhat  from  the  preceding  text.  Why  the  work 
of  Mark  was  left  thus  unfinished,  we  cannot  tell. 
"We  can  only  say  that  the  termination  has  been 
somehow  tampered  with,  and  that  the  difficulties 
connected  with  it  have  not  yet  been  satisfactorily 
solved."  It  is  not  altogether  improbable  that  Mark 
was  compelled  to  flee  from  Rome,  leaving  his  Gospel 
in  this  unfinished  condition. 

VIII.   The  Peculiarities  of  this  Gospel. 

This  is  peculiarly  the  Gospel  of  fact  and  action. 
It  does  not  deal  with  the  words  of  Christ,  so  much 
as  with  His  actions.  It  does  not  contain  any  long 
discourses  of  the  Saviour.  The  style  is  abrupt,  and 
it  seems  at  times  as  though  the  writer  could  not  hasten 


ACCORDING  TO  MARK.  41 

along  fast  enough.  The  Greek  particle  translated 
"  forthwith,"  or  "  immediately,"  or  "  straightway," 
is  used  over  forty  times.  The  other  Evangelists 
make  their  transitions  more  easily,  but  Mark  with 
an  "  immediately "  dashes  on  to  relate  some  other 
event  in  the  wonderful  life  of  the  man  Christ  Jesus. 
Mark  unfolds  the  truth  more  in  acts  than  in  words. 
He  *' frames  a  series  of  pictures." 

Another  characteristic  is  the  way  in  which  Mark  at 
times  dwells  upon  little  particulars, —  as  with  a  stroke 
of  the  pen  he  gives  us  a  word  picture  of  some  action  or 
look  of  the  Saviour,  —  and  thus  gives  us  a  new  insight 
into  the  gracious  manner  of  Christ.  "  At  one  time 
we  find  a  minute  touch  which  places  the  whole  scene 
before  us ;  at  another  an  accessory  circumstance, 
such  as  often  fixes  itself  on  the  mind  without  appear- 
ing at  the  first  sight  to  possess  any  special  interest. 
Now  there  is  a  phrase  which  reveals  the  feeling  of 
those  who  were  the  witnesses  of  some  mighty  work  ; 
now  a  word  which  preserves  some  trait  of  the 
Saviour's  tenderness  or  some  expressive  turn  of  His 
language.""  Dr.  J.  P.  Lange  writes,^^  "From  the 
pages  of  Mark  we  gather  how,  at  the  time,  Jesus 
touched  every  chord  of  feeling  in  the  souls  of  the 
people  —  amazement,  fear,  confidence,  hope,  joy,  de- 
light ;  and  He  adapted  His  power  to  the  varying 
states  of  emotion,  whether  by  reproof,  healing,  or 
sanctification.  The  rapidity  with  which  the  Saviour 
achieved  such  immense  results  ;  the  impetuous  en- 
thusiasm which  characterized  that  day's  work  in 
which  He  pervaded  the  world  with  the  power  and 

"Westcott's  Introd.  to  the  Study  of  the  Gospels,  p.  365. 
^  Lange's  Commentary  on  Mark.     Introd. 


42  THE  GOSPEL 

efficacy  of  His  name  ;  and  the  victorious  strength 
with  which  he  triumphed  over  the  bondage  of  the 
world  and  the  sorrows  of  the  grave,  and  rose  to  the 
throne  of  glory,  are  here  represented  as  the  grand 
characteristics  of  the  Divine  Redeemer,  who  accom- 
plishes His  work  of  redemption  by  a  series  of  rapid 
victories." 

Mark  unrolls  the  short  public  ministry  of  our 
Lord  in  a  series  of  bold  life-pictures  given  in  rapid 
succession.  He  begins  with  the  ministry  of  John  the 
Baptist.  He  takes  no  time  to  explain  and  reveal  the 
inside.  He  dwells  on  the  outward  aspect  of  that  won- 
derful Personality  as  it  struck  the  multitude. 

III.    THE   GOSPEL   ACCORDING  TO   LUKE. 
/.  Canonicity. 

We  do  not  find  any  certain  quotations  from  this 
book  in  the  writings  of  the  Apostolic  Fathers,  al- 
though some  think  that  there  are  echoes  of  its  lan- 
guage in  Clement  of  Rome  (96),  Barnabas  (106),  and 
Hermas  (140-150).  Of  these,  however,  there  is  room 
for  doubt.  When  we  come  to  Marcion  (130)  we  find 
ourselves  on  solid  ground.  Marcion  was  a  heretic, 
who  was  intense  in  his  opposition  to  anything  Jewish. 
'  He  summarily  rejected  the  Old  Testament,  and  formed 
a  Canon  of  his  own.  Into  this  Canon  he  admitted  ten 
of  the  Pauline  Epistles,  since  he  regarded  Paul  as  the 
only  true  Apostle,  as  well  as  a  Gospel  that  he  entitled 
the  "  Gospel  of  Christ."  It  is  now  generally  admitted 
that  this  Gospel  was  none  other  than  a  mutilated 
Luke.  He  altered  Luke  in  such  a  way  as  to  suit  his 
own  peculiar  heretical  notions.     According  to  Ter- 


ACCORDING  TO  LUKE.  43 

tullian,  Cerdon,  the  teacher  of  Marcion,  was  acquainted 
with  this  book.  Of  Justin  Martyr's  (145)  use  of  Luke 
there  can  be  no  question.  Celsus,  the  great  opponent 
of  Christianity,  made  use  of  Luke  in  his  attacks  upon 
the  Christian  faith.  Tatian's  harmony  (150-170)  in 
Syriac  included  it,  and  it  likewise  was  in  the  Syriac 
(160)  and  Old  Latin  (170)  Versions.  The  Muratori 
Canon  (170)  names  it  as  the  ''third  book  of  the  Gos- 
pel." The  heretics  Valentinus  (140)  and  Heracleon 
(150)  used  it  also.  And  all  the  writers  of  the  last 
quarter  of  the  second  century  repeatedly  quote  it  by 
name,  such  as  Irenaeus,  Tertullian,  and  Clement  of 
Alexandria.  This  evidence  is  absolutely  incontro- 
vertible.  There  are  in  all  sixteen  witnesses  distrib- 
uted all  over  the  Church,  who  before  the  end  of  the 
second  century,  testify  either  directly  or  indirectly 
to  the  existence  and  use  of  Luke  in  the  Church  as 
authoritative  Scripture. 

//.  Authorship. 

There  is  but  one  person  whose  name  is  mentioned 
in  the  early  Church  as  the  author  of  this  Gospel,  and 
that  is  ''  Luke  the  beloved  physician."  The  author 
nowhere  mentions  his  own  name,  although  he  refers 
to  himself  in  the  prefatory  words  of  this  Gospel 
(i  :  3).  The  Muratori  Canon  informs  us  in  regard  to 
this  book,  saying,  "The  third  book  of  the  Gospel, 
that  according  to  Luke,  the  well-known  physician. 
Luke  wrote  in  his  own  name  in  order  after  the  ascen- 
sion of  Christ,  and  when  Paul  had  associated  him 
with  himself  as  one  studious  of  right.  Nor  did  he 
himself  see  the  Lord  in  the  flesh  ;  and  he,  according 
as  he  was  able  to  accomplish  it,  began  his  narrative 


44  THE   GOSPEL 

with  the  nativity  of  John."  The  fact  that  Marcion 
made  this  Gospel  the  foundation  of  his  own  Gospel 
presupposes  that  he  regarded  it  as  the  work  of  a  dis- 
ciple of  Paul,  because  of  the  other  fact  that  he  re- 
garded Paul  as  the  only  true  Apostle. 

Luke  was  a  Gentile,  for  in  Col.  4:11,  14,  he  is  con- 
trasted with  the  Jewish  Christians.  Tradition  affirms 
that  he  was  a  native  of  Syrian  AntipchrTTe  "was  a 
physician  (Col.  4 :  14),  and  this  fact  is  borne  out  by 
the  scientific  way  in  which  he  refers  to  diseases. 
"  We  recognize  the  physician  by  the  minute  accuracy 
with  which  he  describes  certain  diseases,  and  find, 
from  other  remarks,  that  the  physician  was  at  the 
same  time  an  excellent  psychologist.  4  :  38  ;  22  143, 
44,  51,  may  be  cited  as  proofs  of  the  former  ;  while  in 
9  :  54-61  ;  18  :  34  ;  23  :  12  ;  24  :  41,  we  find  significant 
hints  of  his  insight  into  the  mysteries  of  human  na- 
ture."^^  Godet  writes:  *' The  circumstance  that  his 
profession  was  that  of  a  physician  is  not  unimpor- 
tant ;  for  it  implies  that  he  must  have  possessed  a  cer- 
tain amount  of  scientific  knowledge,  and  belonged  to 
the  class  of  educated  men.  There  existed  at  Rome  in 
the  time  of  the  Emperors  a  medical  supervision  ;  a 
superior  college  was  charged  with  the  duty  of  exam- 
ining in  every  city  those  who  desired  to  practice  the 
healing  art.  Newly  admitted  men  were  placed  under 
the  direction  of  older  physicians  ;  their  methods  of 
treatment  were  strictly  scrutinized  and  their  mistakes 
severely  punished,  sometimes  by  taking  away  their 
diploma.  For  these  reasons^  Luke  must  have  pos- 
sessed an  amount  of  scientific    and    literary  culture 

12  Van  Oosterzee  in  the  Lange  Commentary  on  Luke.  See  also  Ho- 
bart's  Medical  Language  of  St.  Luke. 


ACCORDING  TO  LUKE.  45 

above   that   of  most   of  the   other  Evangelists  and 

Apostles."" 

Luke's  name  appears  but  three  times  in  all  in  the 
New  Testament  (Col.  4  :  14  ;  Philemon  24  ;  2  Tim.  4  : 
11).  Assuming  what  is  now  generally  admitted,  that 
Luke  wrote  the  Acts,  we  can  from  that  book  add 
materially  to  our  stock  of  knowledge  concerning  the 
man.  At  Acts  16  :  10  the  author  of  that  book  became 
a  companion  of  Paul  on  the  second  missionary  jour- 
ney. It  is  evident  from  the  way  in  which  he  thus 
joined  the  missionaries  at  Troas,  that  he  had  been  a 
Christian  for  some  time.  As  already  noted,  tradition 
makes  Luke  a  native  of  Syrian  Antioch,  and  it  may 
be  that  it  was  there  he  became  acquainted  with  Paul, 
possiblywas  a  convert  of  his.  The  sickness  that  had 
detained  Paul  in  Galatia  (Gal.  4  :  13)  had  occurred 
shortly  before  reaching  Troas,  and  it  may  have  been 
because  of  the  Apostle's  need  of  medical  attendance 
that  Luke  became  associated  with  him  as  a  member 
of  the  missionary  band.  From  Troas  they  went  to 
Philippi,  where  Luke  remained  until  Paul  returned 
there  on  his  third  missionary  journey.  A  very  early 
tradition  identifies  Luke  with  *'  the  brother  whose 
praise  is  in  the  Gospel  throughout  the  churches  "  (2 
Cor.  8  :  18).  If  this  tradition  is  correct,  although  we 
cannot  absolutely  affirm  it  to  be  so,  Luke  accompanied 
Titus  when  he  carried  the  Second  Epistle  to  Corinth. 
From  Philippi  Luke  accompanied  Paul  to  Jerusalem, 
and  he  describes  that  journey  for  us  in  Acts  20 :  5  to 
21  :  18.  Then  came  the  two  tedious  years  of  the 
Caesarean  imprisonment,  during  which  time  Luke 
probably  wrote  his  Gospel  by  the  side  of  Paul,  and 

^*Godet's  Commentary  on  Luke,  Vol.  I.,  p.  17, 


46  THE   GOSPEL 

somewhat  under  his  direction.  The  Evangelist  was 
a  companion  of  Paul  on  the  eventful  journey  to 
Rome,  and  from  that  time  until  the  end  of  the  great 
Apostle's  career,  except  during  temporary  absences 
when  called  away  in  the  service  of  the  Master,  he 
doubtless  remained  with  Paul,  faithfully  and  heroically 
sharing  his  sufferings  and  trials. 

Luke  disclaims  having  been  an  eye-witness  of  the 
life  of  Christ  (i  :  2).  The  tradition  that  he  was  one 
of  the  seventy  sent  out  by  the  Saviour  is  unquestion- 
ably negatived  by  his  own  plain  statement.  It  has 
been  inferred  by  some  that  Luke  had  been  a  slave. 
It  seems  that  frequently  slaves  were  educated  in  the 
medical  profession,  so  as  to  be  able  to  minister  to  the 
needs  of  their  masters.  In  accordance  with  this 
custom,  it  has  been  thought  that  Luke  might  have 
been  the  slave  of  Theophilus,  for  whose  benefit  this 
Gospel  was  primarily  written.  This,  however,  is  all 
conjecture,  and  may  or  may  not  be  true.  The  higher 
character  of  Luke's  style  compared  with  that  of  the 
other  writers  of  the  New  Testament,  as  well  as  his 
exact  knowledge  of  contemporary  history  evinced  in 
his  historical  references,  show  that  he  was  a  man  of 
no  mean  intellectual  attainments.  By  many  ties  was 
he  bound  to  Paul,  who  calls  him  "  the  beloved  physi- 
cian," and  his  fellow-laborer.  There  is  something 
pathetic  in  the  way  in  which  Paul  informs  Timothy 
"only  Luke  is  with  me."  Thus  not  only  had  Luke 
the  intellectual  qualifications  for  being  an  Evangelist, 
but  he  also  had  those  peculiar  qualities  of  heart  that 
fitted  him  for  his  position  by  the  side  of  Paul.  His 
constancy  and  devotion  are  remarkable,  and  show 
hov/  completely  he  had  laid  all  the  powers  he  pos- 
sessed on  the  altar  of  the  Lord's  service. 


ACCORDING  TO  LUKE.  47 

///.     The  Sotirces  of  this  Gospel. 

Luke  has  well  been  called  the  father  of  Christian 
church  history.  We  have  already  noted  the  fact  that 
he  was  not  himself  an  eye-witness  of  the  facts  of 
the  Gospel  history.  He  informs  us  that  the  sources 
of  his  information  were  two-fold,  namely,  numerous 
fragmentary  written  records  that  were  in  existence, 
and  the  testimony  of  eye-witnesses.  ''Many  have 
taken  in  hand  to  set  forth  in  order  a  declaration  of 
those  things  which  are  most  surely  believed  among 
us"  (i  :  i).  These  words  affirm  that  already  before 
he  wrote,  the  attempt  had  been  made  by  many  per- 
sons to  write  out  an  orderly  statement  of  the  inci- 
dents of  the  Gospel  history.  Luke  does  not  belittle 
these  written  records  at  all,  but  simply  states  the 
fact  that  there  were  such  writings.  These  he  had 
carefully  collected  as  far  as  he  was  able.  Then  in 
addition  to  these,  he  had  used  the  advantages  he  had 
of  consulting  those  who  "  from  the  beginning  were 
eye-witnesses,  and  ministers  of  the  word."  Among 
these  latter  we  must  believe  was  Paul,  who  was  able 
to  give  the  Evangelist  a  great  deal  of  information. 
From  these  sources  Luke  compiled  his  Gospel.  Nor 
can  we  suppose  that  the  promised  inspiration  of  the 
Spirit  was  lacking  in  his  case.  Thus  with  true  his- 
torical instinct  he  tested  the  sources  of  his  informa- 
tion, and,  guided  by  the  Holy  Spirit,  he  wrote  in  an 
orderly  manner  that  Theophilus  might  know  the  cer- 
tainty of  those  things,  wherein  he  had  been  in- 
structed. 

Believing  that  Luke  wrote  this  book  at  Csesarea, 
I  think  that  to  the  careful  observer,  there  are  traces 
of  his  having  used   his   opportunities  of  thoroughly 


48  THE   GOSPEL 

acquainting  himself  with  the  things  he  relates,  as 
well  as  the  places  he  describes.  It  is  not  at  all 
probable  that  he  had  Matthew's  Gospel  before  him 
as  he  wrote,  or  that  he  had  it  at  all  in  mind  when 
he  refers  to  the  accounts  of  events  in  the  life  of 
Christ  that  had  been  written.  There  are  too  many 
points  of  dissimilarity  between  Matthew  and  this 
Gospel  to  allow  us  to  think  that  he  was  acquainted 
with  the  First  Gospel.  And  had  Paul  exercised  the 
influence  over  Luke  that  the  early  writers  affirm,  it 
seems  certain  that  he  would  have  made  some  state- 
ment of  that  fact  in  his  preface.  "  The  language  of 
the  preface  is  against  the  notion  of  any  exclusive 
influence  of  St.  Paul.  The  Evangelist,  a  man  on 
whom  the  Spirit  of  God  was,  made  the  history  of 
the  Saviour's  life  the  subject  of  research,  and  with 
the  materials  so  obtained  wrote,  under  the  guidance 
of  the  Spirit  that  was  on  him,  the  history  now  before 
us."^^  At  the  same  time  the  general  influence  of 
Pauline  thought  is  evident  throughout,  in  his  con- 
ception of  the  scope  of  the  Gospel  of  Christ.  Thus 
with  true  historical  instinct,  and  under  the  divine 
guidance  of  the  Spirit,  Luke  wrote  his  Gospel. 

IV.   The  Object  of  this  Gospel. 

The  object  Luke  had  in  writing  this  book  is 
clearly  set  forth  by  him  in  his  prefatory  words.  He 
writes,  "  It  seemed  good  to  me  also,  having  had 
perfect  understanding  of  all  things  from  the  very 
first,  to  write  unto  thee  in  order,  most  excellent 
Theophilus,  that  thou  mightest  know  the  certainty 
of  those  things,  wherein  thou  hast  been  instructed." 
15  Abbot  on  "  Luke  "  in  Smith's  Dictionary  of  the  Bible, 


ACCORDING  TO  LUKE.  49 

He  aims  to  set  forth  the  historical  foundations  of 
the  faith  in  which  Theophilus  believed.  For  this 
reason  he  selected  his  material  with  the  needs  of 
this  man  in  view.  He  designed  to  make  prominent 
the  universal  scope  of  the  Gospel,  presenting  those 
aspects  of  His  work  that  were  best  calculated  to 
strengthen  the  faith  of  Theophilus,  as  well  as  of  that 
class  of  persons  whom  he  represents,  namely,  the 
Greeks. 

V.  For  Whom  Written. 

This  was  primarily  for  Theophilus,  of  whom  we 
know  absolutely  nothing  except  that  he  was  a  Chris- 
tian, and  also  probably  a  man  of  rank,  as  indicated 
by  the  address,  ''  most  excellent  Theophilus."  ''  Mani- 
festly the  Third  Gospel  was  immediately  addressed 
to  the  same  Theophilus  (Luke  i  :  3)  to  whom  the  Acts 
of  the  Apostles  was  addressed  (Acts  i  :  i).  The  name 
is  Greek,  meaning  lover  of  God.  Who  he  was  can 
only  be  conjectured.  Some  have  supposed  from  the 
meaning  of  the  name,  that  it  was  used,  not  to  repre- 
sent any  particular  person,  but  Christians  in  general ; 
others  have  concluded  that  he  was  an  honored  Greek 
with  whom  the  Evangelist  had  been  at  some  time 
intimately  associated  ;  while  most  have  agreed  that 
he  was  only  the  representative  of  a  large  class  to 
whom  the  Gospel  had  been  preached,  and  with  whom 
Luke,  under  the  influence  of  the  Holy  Ghost,  desired 
to  leave  it  as  a  permanent  treasure.  "^^ 

That  Theophilus  was  an  existing  person  must  be 
acknowledged.  And  the  way  in  which  Luke  describes 
the  places  referred  to  in  his  Gospel,  as  well  as  in  the 

**>  Gregory's  Why  Four  Gospels,  p.  207. 
4 


50  THE  GOSPEL 

Acts,  makes  it  evident  that  Theophilus  was  neither 
an  inhabitant  of  Palestine,  nor  of  Asia  Minor,  nor  of 
Greece.  But  when  he  refers  to  places  in  Italy  (Acts 
27:8,  12,  26)  these  minute  descriptions  are  omitted. 
From  this  it  has  been  inferred,  and  doubtless  cor- 
rectly, that  Theophilus  "  was  a  native  of  Italy,  and 
perhaps  an  inhabitant  of  Rome."  But  it  is  also  to  be 
noted  that  the  Church  Fathers,  such  as  Irenseus,  Ori- 
gen,  Gregory  Nazianzen,  and  others,  affirm  that  Luke 
wrote  for  the  Greeks.  This  idea  is  not  necessarily  in 
conflict  with  the  address  of  the  preface,  if  we  regard 
Theophilus  as  a  representative  man.  The  missionary 
work  of  Paul  was  almost  exclusively  among  Greek 
speaking  people,  and  it  was  natural  that  Luke,  be- 
cause of  his  relation  to  the  great  Apostle,  and  under 
the  influence  of  Pauline  thought,  should  compose  his 
Gospel  with  the  needs  of  the  Greeks  in  mind,  although 
addressing  it  for  personal  reasons  to  an  individual 
person.  His  Gospel  ''  was  substantially  that  which 
he  and  Paul  had  proclaimed  to  the  Greek  world  ;  it 
was  produced  and  published  among  Greek  peoples  ; 
and  while  addressed  formally  to  Theophilus,  it  was 
really  written  for  the  Greeks  as  representing  the 
Gentile  world,  and  suited  to  commend  Jesus  to  them 
as  their  Saviour.""  A  close  examination  of  the  lead- 
ing features  of  this  book  fully  bears  out  this  idea. 

VI.     The  Contents  of  this  Gospel, 

I.  Prefatory  Introduction,     i  :  1-4. 
II.  An  account   of  the   time   preceding   Christ's 
public  ministry,  giving  matter  not  found  in  the  other 
Gospels.     I  :  5-2  :  52. 

17  Gregory's  "Why  Four  Gospels,  p.  210. 


ACCORDING  TO  LUKE.  51 

III.  The  Galilean  Ministry,  in  which  is  to  be 
found  much  matter  in  common  with  Matthew  and 
Mark.     3:1-9: 50- 

IV.  The  Last  Journeys  to  Jerusalem,  giving  mat- 
ter principally  peculiar  to  Luke  alone.     9  :  51-18  :  14. 

V.  History  of  events  relating  to  the  sufferings, 
death,  resurrection,  and  ascension  of  the  Saviour. 
18:15-24:53. 

VII.    The  Date  a7id  Place  of  Composition. 

In  the  Acts  Luke  refers  to  this  book  as  "the 
former  treatise,"  and  consequently  it  was  written 
first.  The  Acts  was  written  at  the  close  of  the  two 
years'  imprisonment  of  Paul  in  Rome,  and  before  the 
Apostle's  release,  that  is,  in  63  A.  D.  The  probable 
date  of  the  composition  of  the  Gospel  was  between 
58  and  60  A.  D.,  that  is,  during  the  Caesarean  impris- 
onment. While  it  is  impossible  to  affirm  absolutely, 
yet  Caesarea  was  probably  the  place  of  its  composi- 
tion. We  cannot  separate  the  Gospel  and  the  Acts 
very  much  in  time,  and  accordingly  we  give  the 
above  date  as  the  limits  of  the  time  in  which  the 
Gospel  was  written. 

VIII.   The  Relation  of  Luke  to  Paul. 

This  has  already  been  touched  upon.  We  do  not 
know  Avhen  or  where  these  two  men  first  came  in 
contact  with  each  other.  There  can  be  no  doubt 
but  that  they  had  been  friends  for  some  time  when 
Luke  joined  the  missionary  band  at  Troas  (Acts 
16:10).  And  as  the  time  passed  by  they  became 
more  closely  bound  together  by  those  ties  that  bind 
such   men   to   one    another.     Relinquishing   all   the 


52  THE  GOSPEL 

prospects  of  advancement  and  wealth  that  the  prac- 
tice of  his  profession  might  have  secured  for  him, 
he,  like  Paul,  was  content  to  spend  his  life  in  the 
service  of  the  Master.  His  Gospel,  which  has  been 
entitled  the  *'  Gospel  of  free  salvation  to  all  men," 
presents  the  predominant  features  of  the  Pauline 
theology,  which  emphasizes  the  gratuitousness  and 
universalness  of  salvation.  Some  have  thought  that 
Paul  when  he  speaks  of  '*  my  Gospel "  (Rom.  2:16; 
16 :  25  ;  2  Tim.  2  :  8),  refers  to  this  Gospel,  but  it  is 
far  more  probable  that  Paul  meant  the  phase  of  the 
Gospel  of  Christ  which  he  made  prominent  in  his 
preaching,  and  which  he  dwells  upon  particularly  in 
the  Epistle  to  the  Ephesians.  But  at  the  same  time 
that  expression  very  fittingly  describes  this  Gospel. 
While  rejecting  the  idea  that  Luke  was  practically 
only  the  amanuensis  of  Paul  in  writing  this  Gospel, 
and  holding  that  Luke  was  truly  an  independent 
writer,  I  still  believe  with  Davidson  that  *'  the  mind 
of  the  Evangelist  was  impregnated  with  the  views 
and  phraseology  of  Paul."  The  account  of  the  insti- 
tution of  the  Lord's  Supper  as  given  by  Luke  and 
Paul  (Luke  22  :  19,  20  ;  i  Cor.  11  :  24,  25)  are  almost 
verbally  identical.  "They  are  equally  fond  of  words 
which  characterize  the  freedom  and  universal  desti- 
nation of  the  Gospel  salvation.  They  have  many 
terms  in  common  which  occur  nowhere  else  in  the 
New  Testament.  And  they  often  meet  in  thought 
and  expression  in  a  way  which  shows  both  the  close 
intimacy  and  the  mutual  dependence  of  the  two 
writers."  ** 

isSchafE's  History  of  the  Christian  Church,  Vol.  I,  p.  667. 


ACCORDING  TO  LUKE  53 

IX.   The  Peculiarities  of  this  Gospel. 

Matthew  begins  his  Gospel  with  the  birth  of 
Christ ;  Mark  with  the  ministry  of  John  the  Baptist ; 
while  Luke  goes  back  to  the  circumstances  preced- 
ing the  birth  of  John.  He  presents  Christ  as  the 
Saviour  of  mankind.  In  the  genealogical  table 
(3  •  23-38)  he  traces  the  natural  parentage  of  Jesus 
through  Mary  to  Adam,  and  to  God.  In  this  way 
he  **  presents  Christ  as  the  Son  of  man,  the  partaker 
of  a  common  humanity  with  man,  and,  therefore,  the 
kinsman  Redeemer  of  the  human  family,  without  re- 
spect to  national  distinctions  or  the  ancient  separa- 
tion of  Jews  and  Gentiles  —  the  author  of  a  common 
salvation  for  lost  sinners  everywhere  —  the  Saviour 
of  the  world."  He  portrays  for  us  the  human  growth 
of  the  Saviour,  ''pointing  out  to  us  successively  'the 
fruit  of  the  womb'  (i  142),  the  'babe'  (2:16),  the 
'child' (2:27),  the 'boy'  (2:40),  the  '  man '  (3  :  22)." 

Luke  records  a  great  many  things  about  the  life 
of  Christ  that  are  not  found  in  the  other  Synoptists. 
His  Gospel  contains  more  history  than  either  Matthew 
or  Mark,  having  38  sections,  or  541  verses  peculiar 
to  himself,  while  Matthew  has  but  17  sections  pecul- 
iar to  himself,  and  Mark  only  2.  As  Luke  has  93 
sections  in  all,  it  is  evident  that  more  than  one  third 
of  them  are  not  paralleled  in  Matthew  or  Mark. 
This  fact  alone  overturns  the  idea  of  his  being  de- 
pendent on  either  of  them  for  any  of  his  matter. 
And  it  is  also  to  be  noted  that  there  is  evidence  of 
the  dependence  of  Mark  16:9-20  on  the  correspond- 
ing part  of  Luke.     Luke  is  also  the  best  writer  of 


54  THE   GOSPEL 

Greek  in  the  New  Testament.  His  vocabulary  is 
larger  than  that  of  any  of  the  other  writers.^^  In  his 
Gospel  he  has  55  words,  and  in  the  Acts  135  words 
that  occur  nowhere  else  in  the  New  Testament.  The 
first  two  chapters  are  strongly  tinged  with  Hebraisms, 
doubtless  due  to  the  sources  from  which  they  were 
obtained.  Luke  records  thirteen  parables  and  seven 
miracles  not  found  in  the  other  Gospels.  He  also 
furnishes  the  words  for  the  grandest  hymns  of 
the  Church,  namely:  the  *' Ave  Maria"  (1:28),  the 
"Magnificat"  (1:46),  the  "  Benedictus  "  (1:68),  the 
"Gloria  in  Excelsis"  (2  :  14),  the  "Nunc  Dimittis" 
(2  :  29). 

Another  marked  feature  of  this  book  is  its  numer- 
ous references  to  contemporaneous  history.  To  it 
more  than  to  any  other  are  we  indebted  for  the  data 
upon  which  it  is  possible  to  fix  the  dates  of  some  of 
the  important  events  of  the  Gospel  history.  He  refers 
to  the  members  of  the  Herodian  family,  the  emperors 
Augustus  and  Tiberius,  the  census  under  the  Syrian 
governor  Quirinius.  The  most  careful  and  critical 
investigation  has  been  made  of  all  these  references 
of  the  Evangelist,  with  the  result  of  demonstrating 
the  true  historical  character  of  his  writings. 

Canon  Farrar  writes  of  this  Gospel  that  it  "  is  the 
Gospel  not  only  of  children  and  of  the  Gentiles,  and 
of  the  humble  and  the  despised,  of  the  blind,  the 
lame,  the  halt,  the  maimed,  but  even  of  the  publican 
and  the  harlot,  the  prodigal  and  the  outcast ;  not 
only   of  Mary,  but  of  the   Magdalene  ;    not  only  of 

^9  For  further  examination  of  the  comparisons  and  contrasts,  see 
Schaff's  History,  W^estcott's  Introduction  to  the  Study  of  the  Gos- 
pels, etc. 


ACCORDING  TO  JOHN.  55 

Zacchaeus,  but  of  the  dying  thief."     It  is  the  Gospel 
that  presents  Jesus  as  the  Sayiour  of  J;fie^orld. 

IV.   THE   GOSPEL   ACCORDING  TO  JOHN. 

/.  Canonicity. 

In  regard  to  the  use  of  this  Gospel  by  the  Apos- 
tolic Fathers,  the  words  of  Professor  Warfield  may 
be  quoted  :  **  To  take  them  up  one  by  one  we  may 
say:  First,  that  Polycarp  (ii6)  has  no  direct  quota- 
tions from  St.  John's  Gospel,  which  indeed,  consider- 
ing the  briefness  and  general  character  of  his  letter, 
is  not  surprising.  But  he  has  a  clear  reference  to 
John's  First  Epistle  ;  and  this  implies  the  Gospel. 
Whoever  wrote  one  wrote  both  ;  nay,  wrote  both  at 
the  same  time,  and  sent  them  forth  together.  To 
witness  to  one  implies,  therefore,  a  witness  to  both. 
Barnabas  (io6)  again  has  no  direct  quotations  from 
St.  John  ;  and  his  evidence  rests  on  his  use  of  John's 
vocabulary  and  his  reiteration  of  John's  theology. 
Clement  (96)  does  not  seem  to  quote  John,  although 
there  are  some  very  noticeable  coincidences  of  lan- 
guage with  First  John.  For  direct  quotations  of 
John's  Gospel  we  are  thrown  back  thus  on  Ignatius 
(115)  ;  and  he  supplies  them  to  us."^^  The  Epistle  to 
Diognetus  (117)  clearly  refers  to  John  3:16.  The 
Teaching  of  the  Twelve  Apostles  (115)  evinces  an 
unmistakable  correspondence  of  ideas  and  words  with 
John.  "The  eucharistic  prayers  of  the  Teaching 
breathe  a  Johannean  atmosphere. "  ^^  The  Testaments 
of  the  Twelve  Patriarchs  (120)  repeatedly  echoes 
John.     Papias  (120-130)  clearly  used  First  John,  and, 

"^^  Syllabus  on  the  Canon,  printed  for  his  students,  p.  34. 
2iSchaff's  Teaching  of  the  Twelve  Apostles,  p.  90. 


56  THE   GOSPEL 

according  to  Irenseus,  he  also  quotes  the  Gospel. 
Among  the  heretics,  Basilides  (125)  used  it ;  Marcion 
(130),  according  to  TertuUian,  rejected  Matthew  and 
John,  a  fact  which  implies  their  apostolic  authority  ; 
Valentinus  (140)  also  used  it ;  Heracleon  (150)  wrote 
a  commentary  on  it,  which  Origen  quotes  ;  the  Oph- 
ites ascribed  scriptural  authority  to  it ;  and  the  Naas- 
senes  and  Peratici  used  it.  The  use  of  it  by  Justin 
Martyr  (145)  has  been  settled  beyond  all  possibility 
of  doubt. ^^  Tatian  (150-170)  verbally  quotes  i  :5  and 
4 :  24,  the  former  of  which  he  introduces  with  the 
words,  ''  That  which  was  spoken,"  proving  that  he 
regarded  it  as  Scripture  :  while  his  Harmony  included 
it,  beginning  with  the  opening  words  of  this  Gospel. 
Jerome  informs  us  that  Theophilus  of  Antioch  (168- 
182)  composed  a  work,  comparing  the  four  Gospels 
together,  a  fact  that  implies  the  recognition  of  John 
by  the  Church  at  large.  Among  other  witnesses  to 
be  summoned  in  favor  of  this  Gospel  are  Hermas 
(140-150),  Melito  of  Sardis  (170),  Apollinaris  (175), 
Athenagoras  (177),  the  Letter  of  the  Churches  of 
Lyons  and  Vienne  (177),  the  Muratori  Canon  (170), 
the  Syriac  (160),  and  Old  Latin  (170)  Versions.  By 
Irenaeus,  TertuUian,  and  Clement  of  Alexandria,  the 
great  writers  of  the  last  quarter  of  the  second  century, 
it  is  freely  used  and  quoted  by  name. 

There  are  in  all  at  least  nineteen  witnesses  to  the 
use  and  recognition  of  John  before  the  end  of  the 
second  century.  And  against  all  these  there  is  only 
one  voice  to  be  cited,  and  that  of  an  insignificant 
little  heretical  sect,  known  as  the  Alogi,  who  rejected 
it  because  of  the  conflict  of  i  :  i  with  their  peculiar 

22  Abbot's  Authorship  of  the  Fourth  Gospel. 


ACCORDING  TO  JOHN.  57 

ideas.  Bleek  writes  :  **  My  conviction  at  least  is  that 
an  unprejudiced  consideration  of  the  external  testi- 
monies leads  to  the  certain  conclusion  that  our 
Fourth  Gospel  was  recognized  as  a  trustworthy 
authority  and  a  genuine  work  in  the  various  churches 
of  Christendom  before  the  middle  of  the  second  cent- 
ury." And  the  same  writer,  referring  to  the  second 
century  controversies,  adds :  "  The  position  which 
the  contending  parties  in  all  these  controversies  al- 
lowed to  our  Gospel  can  be  historically  explained 
only  on  the  supposition  that  it  was  known  and  recog- 
nized as  genuine  in  the  Church  at  large  some  decades 
of  years  before  the  middle  of  the  second  century,  if 
not  from  the  very  beginning  of  it :  and  this  fact  in 
turn  can  only  be  explained  upon  the  supposition  that 
it  is  a  genuine  and  apostolic  work."^^  Olshausen  af- 
firms that  *'  the  Gospel  of  John  possesses  stronger 
testimony  with  respect  to  its  genuineness  than  per- 
haps any  other  writing  in  the  New  Testament,  or,  we 
may  say,  of  the  whole  of  antiquity."^* 

But  no  book  has  been  as  persistently  assailed  by 
rationalistic  criticism  as  this  one.  No  doubts  about 
it  were  expressed  until  1820  A.  D.,  when  the  first 
assaults  were  made  upon  it.  The  Johannean  ques- 
tion is  a  life  and  death  question  between  conserva- 
tive and  destructive  criticism.  *'  The  vindication  of 
the  Fourth  Gospel  as  a  genuine  product  of  John, 
the  beloved  disciple,  is  the  death  blow  of  the  myth- 
ical and  legendary  reconstruction  and  destruction 
of  the  life  of  Christ  and  the  apostolic  history." 
Rationalistic  criticism  has  boldly  proclaimed  but  a 

23Bleek's  Introd.  to  the  N.  T.,  Vol.  I.,  p.  250. 
2* Olshausen  on  the  Gospels,  Vol.  III.,  p.  171. 


58  THE  GOSPEL' 

few  years  ago  that  we  must  date  this  book  at  not 
earlier  than  i6o  A.  D.  But  this  verdict  of  rational- 
ism has  been  triumphantly  answered  by  a  believing 
criticism,  which  has  repeatedly  vindicated  the  earlier 
date  it  claims.  Dr.  Sanday  has  but  lately  written 
that  it  is  a  "  serious  matter  for  the  consideration  of 
the  opponents  of  this  Gospel,"  that  "  we  are  getting 
perilously  near  St.  John's  time,  and  the  gap  is  unex- 
pectedly filling  up."  The  same  writer  concludes, 
"  If  the  inquiries  which  are  now  in  progress  should 
have  the  result  which  it  seems  very  possible  they 
may  have,  three  consequences  will  follow  :  (i)  The 
view  which  places  the  composition  of  the  Gospel  in 
the  second  century  will  be  clearly  untenable  ;  (2) 
it  will  be  established  that  the  Gospel  had  its  origin 
in  some  leading  Christian  circle  at  the  time  and 
place  which  tradition  assigns  to  it ;  (3)  it  will  be 
increasingly  probable  that  its  author  was  St.  John."  ^^ 
And  we  may  conclude  this  section  by  the  affirmation 
that  despite  the  determined  assaults  of  its  enemies, 
there  never  has  been  a  time  when  we  could  feel 
more  confident  than  now,  that  this  Gospel  was  truly 
the  product  of  the  pen  of  John,  and  that  its  canon- 
ical authority  has  been  acknowledged  by  the  Church 
in  all  ages.^^ 

//.    The  Authorship  of  this  Gospel. 

The  voice  of  the  early  Church,  as  soon  as  it  begins 
to  express  an  opinion  on  this  subject,  is  unanimous 

'^Sanday  in  the  Expositor,  Dec,  1891,  p.  419. 

86  On  this  whole  subject  see  especially  Abbot's  Authorship  of  the 
Fourth  Gospel ;  Bishop  Lightf oot  in  the  Expositor,  4th  Series,  Vol.  I. ; 
Gloag's  Johannine  Writings  ,  Sanday  in  the  Expositor,  4th  Series,  Vol, 
XV.;  Godet's,  Westcott's,  Meyer's  Commentaries  on  John, 


ACCORDING  TO  JOHN.  59 

in  asserting  that  it  proceeded  from  the  pen  of  John, 
the  beloved  disciple.  But  turning  to  the  internal 
evidence  of  the  book  on  this  subject,  we  will  find 
that  there  is  little  reason  for  doubting  the  correct- 
ness of  this  opinion  of  the  Church. 

(i.)  The  author  of  this  book  was  a  Jew.  This  is 
proven  by  the  fact  that  the  author  is  thoroughly  con- 
versant not  only  with  the  Old  Testament,  but  also 
with  Jewish  usages  and  opinions.  While  the  book 
was  written  in  Greek,  it  is  thoroughly  Hebraistic  in 
its  general  style.  "  The  Hebraism  comes  out  less  in 
the  vocabulary  than  in  the  construction  of  the  sen- 
tences, the  fondness  for  parallel  clauses,  the  frequent 
repetition  of  the  same  thought,  with  slight  modifica- 
tions of  sense  and  form,  the  simple  modes  of  conjunc- 
tion, the  absence  of  complicated  periods."  ^^ 

(2.)  The  author  was  a  Palestinian  Jew.  He 
evinces  the  most  intimate  acquaintance  with  the 
historical  and  geographical  relations  of  the  country. 
The  book  abounds  in  vividness  and  directness  of 
descriptions,  as  well  as  in  individual  details  in  regard 
to  the  places  referred  to.  Renan  says  of  4:1-38, 
that  "  only  a  Jew  of  Palestine  who  had  often  passed 
the  entrance  of  the  valley  of  Sichem  could  have 
written  that."  His  descriptions  show  that  he  had 
personally  been  over  the  ground,  evincing  a  minute 
acquaintance  with  the  localities  mentioned.  "  He 
knows  thoroughly  the  localities  of  Jerusalem  and  of 
the  Temple,  as,  for  example,  the  pool  of  Bethesda  by 
the  sheep  gate,  with  its  five  porches  ;  the  pool  of 
Siloam  ;  Solomon's  porch,  and  the  treasury  in  the 
Temple  ;   the  brook   Kedron  ;   the  place  of  a  skull, 

*7  Sanday's  Authorship  of  the  Fourth  Gospel,  p.  2& 


60  THE   GOSPEL 

called  Golgotha ;  and  Joseph's  sepulchre  in  the 
garden."  ^« 

(3.)  The  author  was  also  an  eye-witness  of  the 
events  he  describes  (i  :  29,  35-40  ;  2:1;  5:7;  8  :  20  ; 
9:1-7;  10:20;  18:1,  et  passim).^^  Indeed,  he  ex- 
pressly claims  this  (i  :  14 ;  ist  John  i  :  1-4).  The 
minute  details  in  which  he  frequently  indulges  are 
the  graphic  descriptions  of  one  who  witnessed  per- 
sonally the  facts  he  relates. 

(4.)  He  was  an  Apostle.  This  is  borne  out  by 
the  fact  that  only  one  who  belonged  to  the  inner 
circle  of  the  disciples  could  have  been  a  witness  of 
the  things  he  graphically  relates.  ''  He  initiates  us 
into  the  peculiar  relations  which  Jesus  maintained 
with  each  one  of  them,  and  especially  loves  to  recall 
the  striking  words  in  which  their  characters  or 
secret  thoughts  disclose  themselves."  ^"^  (1:38-50; 
4:31-38;  6:5-9,  70;  9:2;  II  :  16;  12:21,  22;  13  : 
6-9,23-25,  27-30;  14:5,  8,  22;  16:17,  18,  29,  30; 
18:  16;  20:3-8,  28.) 

Now  to  whom  do  these  descriptions  apply  but  to 
John  ?  The  author  must  have  been  one  of  the  favored 
three,  but  certainly  he  could  not  have  been  either 
Peter  or  James.  He  could  only  have  been  John, 
"  the  disciple  whom  Jesus  loved."  And  that  it  was 
he,  is  also  borne  out  by  the  way  in  which  he  refers 
to  the  Baptist.  He  never  says  John  the  Baptist,  as 
the  Synoptists  do,  for  he  does  not  feel  the  need  of 
distinguishing  himself  from  the  forerunner  of  the 
Saviour.     Thus  while  he  holds  back  his  own  name, 

^*  Gloag's  Johannine  Writings,  p.  118. 
29Godet  on  John,  Vol.  I.,  p.  103  f£. 
30Godet,  ib.,  p.  254. 


ACCORDING  TO  JOHN.  61 

his  personality  is  manifest  throughout.  There  is  a 
tacit  claim  that  he  is  John  the  Apostle.  Baur  coolly 
informs  us  that  the  design  of  the  author  was  evi- 
dently to  lead  the  reader  to  believe  that  he  was  the 
Apostle  John,  for  that  was  who  he  was.  Bleek  says, 
•*  Our  investigation  has  confirmed  us  in  the  steadfast 
conviction,  which  is  unavoidably  urged  upon  us  ever 
and  anon  from  different  considerations,  that  this 
Fourth  Gospel  is  really  the  work  of  St.  John,  the 
trusted  and  beloved  disciple  of  the  Lord."  Dr. 
Schaff  also  writes,  *'  A  review  of  the  array  of  testi- 
monies, external  and  internal,  drives  us  to  the  irresisti- 
ble conclusion  that  the  Fourth  Gospel  is  the  work  of 
John  the  Apostle.  This  view  is  clear,  self-consistent 
and  in  full  harmony  with  the  character  of  the  book 
and  the  whole  history  of  the  apostolic  age  ;  while  the 
hypothesis  of  a  literary  fiction  and  pious  fraud  is  con- 
tradictory, absurd,  and  self-condemned.  No  writer 
in  the  second  century  could  have  produced  such  a 
marvelous  book,  which  towers  high  above  all  the 
books  of  Justin  Martyr  and  Irenaeus  and  Tertullian 
and  Clement  and  Origen,  or  any  father  or  schoolman 
or  reformer.  No  writer  in  the  first  century  could 
have  written  it  but  an  Apostle,  and  no  Apostle  but 
John,  and  John  himself  could  not  have  written  it 
without  divine  inspiration."^^ 

John's  parents  were  Zebedee  (Mark  i  :  19)  and 
Salome  (Mark  15:40  cf.  Matt.  27:56).  Their  cir- 
cumstances in  life  were  comfortable.  Zebedee  had 
hired  servants  (Mark  i  :  20),  and  also  partners  in  his 
business  as  a  fisherman  (Luke  5:10);  his  wife  Salome 
was  one  of  the  women  who  ministered  to  the  Saviour 

siSchafE's  History  of  the  Christian  Church,  Vol.  I.,  p.  714. 


62  THE   GOSPEL 

of  their  substance  (Luke  8  :  3),  and  went  to  the  sep- 
ulchre prepared  to  embalm  His  body  (Mark  16  :  i)  ; 
and  John  himself  owned  a  home  (John  19  :  27).  John 
doubtless  had  a  good  common  education,  judging 
from  his  writings,  although  he  had  received  no 
special  rabbinical  instruction  (Acts  4:  13).  He  was 
first  a  disciple  of  the  Baptist,  by  whom  he  was  di- 
rected to  the  Saviour  (i  :  29-40).  With  Andrew  he 
followed  Christ  thus  pointed  out,  and  after  their  in- 
terview with  Him,  they  were  firmly  convinced  of  His 
Messiahship.  John  thus  became  one  of  the  first  two 
disciples  of  Jesus.  His  own  personal  qualifications 
not  only  secured  for  him  a  place  in  the  apostolate, 
but  also  in  the  inner  circle  of  the  Apostles  with 
Peter  and  James.  These  three  disciples  were  pecul- 
iarly favored,  and  were  brought  into  the  most  inti- 
mate relations  with  the  Master.  John  remained 
closely  with  Jesus  after  his  call  to  the  apostolate, 
and  was  admitted  to  closer  relations  to  Him  than 
any  of  the  others.  He  was  the  disciple  whom  Jesus 
loved  and  at  the  last  Supper  he  was  accorded  the 
place  of  honor  next  to  Jesus,  that  of  leaning  on  His 
bosom.  And  passing  by  His  own  brothers,  the  Sav- 
iour, as  He  hung  upon  the  cross,  showed  His 
supreme  confidence  in  the  beloved  disciple,  by 
committing   to   his   care    His    mother. 

After  the  Ascension,  John  and  Peter  were  the  most 
prominent  characters  among  the  disciples.  John 
was  one  of  the  three  pillars  of  the  church  at  Jerusa- 
lem, who  gave  the  right  hand  of  fellowship  to  Paul 
as  the  Apostle  to  the  Gentiles  (Gal.  2  : 9).  He  was 
'*  the  faithful  colleague  and  wise  counselor"  of  Peter 
in  the  days  when  he  was  founding  the  Church.     We 


ACCORDING  TO  JOHN.  63 

have  no  means  of  telling  just  when  John  left  Jerusa- 
lem, but  that  he  did  remove  to  Ephesus,  and  there 
became  the  commanding  personality  in  the  church 
of  that  region  for  the  last  quarter  of  the  first  century- 
is  abundantly  proven  by  tradition.  Bishop  Light- 
foot  writes,  "At  length  the  hidden  fires  of  his  nature 
burst  into  a  flame.  When  St.  Peter  and  St.  Paul 
have  ended  their  labors,  the  more  active  career  of 
St.  John  is  just  beginning.  If  it  has  been  their  task 
to  organize  and  extend  the  church,  to  remove  her 
barriers,  and  to  advance  her  liberties,  it  is  his  special 
province  to  build  up  and  complete  her  theology. 
The  most  probable  chronology  makes  his  withdrawal 
from  Palestine  to  Asia  Minor  coincide  very  nearly 
with  the  martyrdom  of  these  two  Apostles,  who 
have  guided  the  church  through  her  first  storms 
and  led  her  to  her  earliest  victories.  This  epoch 
divides  his  life  into  two  distinct  periods.  Hitherto 
he  has  lived  as  a  Jew  among  Jews  ;  henceforth  he 
will  be  as  a  Gentile  among  Gentiles.  The  writings 
of  St.  John  in  the  canon  probably  mark  the  close  of 
each  period.  The  Apocalypse  winds  up  his  career 
in  the  church  of  the  circumcision  ;  the  Gospel  and 
the  Epistles  are  the  crowning  result  of  a  long  resi- 
dence in  the  heart  of  Gentile  Christendom."^^ 

That  the  Ephesian  residence  was  broken  into  by 
John's  exile  to  Patmos  is  clear.  This  probably  oc- 
curred during  the  reign  of  Domitian.  Tradition  has 
many  things  to  relate  about  the  residence  at  Ephe- 
sus, among  which  the  most  probable  are  his  conflict 
with  the  heretic  Cerinthus  and  his  reclaiming  of  the 
robber   chief     Investigations   at    Ephesus  have  dis- 

^^Lightfoot  on  Galatians,  p.  198. 


64  THE    GOSPEL 

covered  the  probable  site  of  the  church  in  which 
John  must  often  have  preached,  as  well  as  the  house 
in  which  he  resided.  It  is  probable  that  John  died 
a  natural  death  at  an  advanced  age  in  the  last 
decade  of  the  first  century.  Tradition  says  that  he 
was  cast  into  a  caldron  of  boiling  oil,  but  that  he 
was  unhurt  by  it.  It  is  said  that  he  became  so 
feeble  that  he  had  to  be  carried  to  his  beloved 
church,  and  could  only  say  in  words  of  heavenly 
benediction  on  the  assembled  Christians,  '*  Little 
children,  love  one  another."  Dean  Stanley  writes, 
"We  see  him  —  it  surely  is  no  unwarranted  fancy  — 
we  see  him  declining  with  the  declining  century, 
every  sense  and  faculty  waxing  feebler,  but  that 
one  divinest  faculty  of  all  burning  more  and  more 
brightly  ;  we  see  it  through  every  look  and  gesture, 
the  one  animating  principle  of  the  atmosphere  in 
which  he  lives  and  moves  ;  earth  and  heaven,  the 
past,  the  present,  and  the  future  alike  echoing  to 
him  that  dying  strain  of  his  latest  words,  *  We  love 
Him  because  he  first  loved  us.'" 

The  personal  character  of  John  is  most  beautiful. 
It  is  not  a  character  that  was  in  any  sense  weak. 
The  name  Boanerges  given  him  by  the  Saviour 
(Mark  3  :  17)  implies  the  intensity  of  his  nature. 
His  abhorrence  of  sin  was  intense,  and  he  could  rise 
to  impassioned  utterance  of  the  highest  type  when 
denouncing  it.  He  was  peculiarly  bound  to  the 
Saviour.  The  key  word  of  his  First  Epistle,  which 
was  the  companion  piece  to  his  Gospel,  is  love.  Nor 
was  John's  love  merely  a  "  soft  feeling,  but  a  living 
principle,  an  absolute  devotion  to  truth,  as  he  had 
seen  it  and  known  it  in  the  person  of  his  Lord."    It 


ACCORDING  TO  JOHN:  §5 

was  a  love  that  was  the  strong  and   abiding  passion 
of  his  deep,  intuitive  nature. 

///.  For  Whom  Written. 

From  very  early  days  it  has  been  held  that  John 
wrote  his  Gospel  for  the  benefit  of  Christians  in  gen- 
eral^ There  is  an  early  tradition  that  it  was  at  the 
earnest  request  of  the  Christians  of  Ephesus,  that 
John,  as  the  one  best  qualified  for  writing  a  Gospel, 
because  of  the  intimate  relations  he  had  sustained  to 
Jesus,  wrote  this  book  for  the  instruction  and  estab- 
lishment in  the  faith  of  Christians  everywhere.  This 
is  abundantly  sustained  by  the  tenor  of  the  whole 
book.  There  can  be  no  question  but  that  this  apos- 
tolic Evangelist  had  in  mind  the  needs  of  the  Chris- 
tian world  at  the  close  of  the  first  century,  as  he 
wrote  this  Gospel. 

IV.   The  Occasion  and  Design  of  this  Gospel. 

The  Apostle  tells  us  plainly  why  he  wrote  this 
Gospel.  "And  many  other  signs  truly  did  Jesus  in 
the  presence  of  his  disciples,  which  are  not  written 
in  this  book:  but  these  are  written,  that  ye  might 
believe  that  Jesus  is  the  Christ,  the  Son  of  God  ;  and 
tliat  believing  ye  might  have  life  through  His  name ' 
(20:30,  31).  It  is  evident  from  these  words  that 
John  chiefly  designed  in  his  Gospel  to  bring  forth 
into  the  clearest  light  the  divinity  of  Christ.  The 
whole  of  the  book  is  in  keeping  with  this  central 
design. 

Clement  of  Alexandria  informs  us  that  "John, 
perceiving  that  the  external  facts  had  been  made 
plain  in  the  Gospel  (/.  e.^  in  the  Synoptic  Gospels), 
5 


66  THE  GOSPEL 

being  urged  by  his  friends,  and  inspired  by  the 
Spirit,  composed  a  spiritual  Gospel."  ^^  The  idea^f 
the  early  Church  Fathers  is  that  this  Gospel  was 
intended  to  be  supplemental  to  the  other  three. 
This  traditionary  idea  gives,  as  the  occasion  of  the 
writing  of  this  book  by  John,  the  repeated  requests 
of  his  fellow  Christians,  that  he,  as  the  one  who 
enjoyed  such  close  relations  to  Christ,  should  commit 
to  writing  a  Gospel  that  would  supplement  and  fill 
out  the  Synoptic  Gospels.  This  supplemental  design 
will  account  for  the  fact  that  he  does  not  traverse 
the  same  grounds  as  the  other  Evangelists  do,  but 
gives  a  great  deal  of  matter  peculiar  to  himself.  But 
this  could  not  have  been  the  primary  design  of  the 
Apostle,  although  it  is  not  excluded  by  the  intention 
and  design  he  expresses.  Another  design  has  been 
suggested,  and  that  is,  that  this  Gospel  is  polemical, 
intended  to  confute  the  heretical  opinions  that  were 
rife  in  the  Church  in  his  day.  Both  Irenaeus  and 
Jerome  name  Cerinthus,  the  great  heresiarch  of  Asia 
Minor,  as  the  one  against  whom  this  book  was  di- 
rected. There  is  no  question  but  that  in  his  First 
Epistle,  which  was  the  practical  application  of  this 
Gospel,  and  its  companion  piece,  John  aimed  to  con- 
trovert the  positions  of  the  early  Gnostics.  But  the 
same  cannot  be  said  of  this  Gospel.  It  is  true  that 
such  terms  as  *'  life,"  **  light,"  and  others,  that  were 
pet  phrases  with  the  Gnostics,  are  here  used,  but  it 
can  hardly  be  affirmed  that  they  were  used  thus  with 
polemical  purpose.  The  Gnostics  denied  the  divinity 
of  Christ,  and  their  denial  doubtless  in  part  occasioned 
this  masterly  Gospel,  that  revolves  around  that  great 
83  Eusebius'  Ecclesiastical  History,  6 ;  14. 


ACCORDING  TO  JOHN.  67 

central  doctrine ;  but  still  the  historical  purpose  is 
the  most  prominent.  Strong  and  positive  expressions 
of  truth  always  conflict  with  error.  But  this  Gospel 
was  meant  more  to  establish  the  truth  than  to  assail 
error.  Still  others  insist  that  the  design  of  John  was 
dogmatic,  that  he  uses  his  Gospel  as  the  vehicle  for 
communicating  his  system  of  theology. 

Now  none  of  these  three  theories  are  necessarily 
in  conflict  with  one  another ;  on  the  contrary,  they 
may  all  together  be  true  as  minor  purposes  of  the 
Apostle.  Still  the  primary  object  was  really  two- 
fold. "Whilst  the  other  Gospels  contain  a  record  of 
the  life  of  Christ  for  the  information  of  the  Church, 
the  Fourth  Gospel  is  essentially  an  historical  writing 
composed  with  an  evangelical  purpose."^*  Thus  John 
aims,  first,  to  establish  Christians  in  the  faith  in  the 
divinity  of  Christ ;  and,  second,  by  the  way  of  that 
faith,  to  enable  them  to  secure  life  through  His  name. 
He  designed,  then,  "  to  lead  men  to  believe  that  Jesus 
was  the  Christ,  the  Son  of  God,  and  to  enable  them 
to  derive  spiritual  and  eternal  life  through  their  faith 
in  Him."^^ 

V,  The  Sources  of  this  Gospel. 

While  John  undoubtedly  had  seen  the  Synoptic 
Gospels,  we  may  emphatically  affirm  that  he  was 
dependent  on  no  written  sources.  He  explicitly 
claims  to  have  been  an  eye-witness  of  the  events  he 
records,  and  his  whole  Gospel  has  the  vividness  of 
one  who  was  relating  what  he  personally  had  seen 
and  heard.  He  writes,  **We  beheld  His  glory,  the 
glory  as  of  the  only  begotten  of  the  Father"  (i  :  14). 

s^Gloag's  Johannine  Writings,  p.  155,  55ib.,  p.  157, 


68  THE   GOSPEL 

And  in  his  First  Epistle,  he  also  writes,  "That  which 
we  have  heard,  which  we  have  seen  with  our  eyes, 
which  we  have  looked  upon,  and  our  hands  have 
handled,  of  the  word  of  life  ;  (for  the  life  was  mani- 
fested, and  we  have  seen  it,  and  bear  witness,  and 
show  unto  you  that  eternal  life,  which  was  with  the 
Father,  and  was  manifested  unto  us  ;)  that  which  we 
have  seen  and  heard  declare  we  unto  you."  (i  John 
I  :  1-3.)  From  these  words,  it  is  plain  that  he  drew 
his  material  entirely  from  his  own  personal  knowl- 
edge. He  informs  us  that  he  had  omitted  many 
things  he  might  have  written  (20:30).  He  only 
recorded  as  much  as  was  needed  for  the  specific 
purpose  he  had  in  view. 

VI.   The  Contents  of  this  Gospel. 

The  following  outline,  given  by  Dr.  Gloag,  is 
admirable :  — 

The  Prologue :  the  incarnation  of  the  Word,  i  : 
1-18. 

I.  The  revelation  and  ministry  of  the  Son  of  God 
to  the  world. 

a.  Testimonies  borne  to  Christ :   by  the  Baptist, 

I  :  19-34  ;  by  the  disciples,  i  :  35-51  ;  by  His 
miracles,  2  : 1-12. 

b.  The  ministry  of  Christ :  in  Judea,  2  :  13-3  :  36  ; 

in  Samaria,  4  :  1-42  ;  in  Galilee,  4  :  43-54- 

c.  Christ's  self-revelation  as  the  Son  of  God  :   in 

Jerusalem,  5  :  1-47  ;  in  Galilee,  6  : 1-7  :  10. 
d»  Christ's  ministry  in  Jerusalem :  at  the  feast  of 
Tabernacles,    7:11-8:59;   at   the    feast   of 
Dedication,  9 :  i-io :  42. 


ACCORDING  TO  JOHN',  69 

e,  Christ's  glorification  as  the  Son  of  God  in  the 

resurrection  of  Lazarus,  ii  :  1-57. 
/.  Close  of  Christ's  public  ministry,  12  : 1-50. 

II.  The  revelation  and  ministry  of  the  Son  of  God 
to  His  disciples. 

a.  The  last  discourses  of  Christ  to  His  disciples, 

13:1-16:33. 

b.  The  sacerdotal  prayer,  17  :  1-26. 

III.  The  revelation  of  the  Son  of  God  in  His  suf- 
ferings and  resurrection. 

a.  The  last  sufferings  of  Christ,  18  :  1-19:42. 

b.  The  resurrection,  20:  1-3 1. 
The  Epilogue. 

a.  The  appearance  of  the  risen  Lord  at  the  Sea  of 

Tiberias,  21  :  1-14. 

b.  The  Lord  and  His  two  disciples,  Peter  and  John, 

21 :  15-25 

VII.    The  Date  arid  Place  of  Composition,  . 

All  early  writers  declare  that  John  wrote  last  of 
all.  And  in  keeping  with  this  are  the  internal  marks 
of  the  book  itself  The  heretical  ideas  combated  in 
the  First  Epistle  were  the  ideas  that  were  prevalent 
at  the  close  of  the  first  century.  The  dates  that 
various  writers  suggest  range  from  70  A.  D.  to  90 
A.  D.,  the  majority  dating  it  about  80  A.  D.  But 
considering  the  manifestly  close  relation  that  exists 
between  this  Gospel  and  the  First  Epistle,  together 
with  the  reasons  for  as  late  a  date  as  possible  for  the 
latter,  I  am  inclined  to  date  this  Gospel  at  about  go, 
A.  D.  John  lived  until  98  A.  D.  Nor  can  there  be 
any  reasonable  doubt  as  to  the  place  of  composition 
having  been  Eghesus,     There  is  no  real  support  for 


IrO  THE  GOSPEL 

the  idea  that  it  was  written  on  Patmos  at  the  same 
time  as  the  Apocalypse. 

VIII .    The  Peculiarities  of  this  Gospel, 

None  of  the  other  Gospels  have  as  strongly  marked 
peculiarities  as  this  one  has.  In  its  language  it  is 
composed  in  the  simplest  Greek.  Idiomatic  expres- 
sions are  avoided.  There  are  no  involved  sentences 
in  it,  and  there  is  a  very  limited  use  of  particles  in 
the  construction  of  its  sentences.  It  is  "pure  Greek 
in  vocabulary  and  grammar,  but  thoroughly  Hebrew 
in  temper  and  spirit,  even  more  so  than  any  other 
book,  and  can  be  almost  literally  translated  into 
Hebrew  without  losing  its  force  and  beauty." 

John  alone  gives  us  any  information  about  the 
early  Judean  ministry  of  our  Saviour.  Were  we  left 
to  the  Synoptists  alone  for  information,  we  would 
never  certainly  know  that  our  Lord's  ministry  was 
longer  than  one  year,  but  John  mentions  four  Pass- 
overs (2  :  13  ;  5  :  I  ;  6  : 4  ;  13:1).  From  this  we  know 
that  His  ministry  extended  over  three  years.  Of  the 
62  sections  in  John's  Gospel,  32  contain  matter  not 
recorded  elsewhere.  This  Apostle  preserves  for  us 
the  most  charming  of  our  Lord's  discourses.  **  John 
gives  us  an  abundance  of  new  matter  of  great  inter- 
est and  importance.  Right  at  the  threshold  we  are 
startled  as  by  a  peal  of  thunder  from  the  depths  of 
eternity  :  *  In  the  beginning  was  the  Word.'  And  as 
we  proceed,  we  hear  about  the  creation  of  the  world, 
the  shining  of  the  true  light  in  darkness,  the  pre- 
paratory revelations,  the  incarnation  of  the  Word, 
the  testimony  of  the  Baptist  to  the  Lamb  of  God. 
We  listen  with  increasing  wonder  to  those  mysteri- 


ACCORDING  TO  JOHN.  71 

ous  discourses  about  the  new  birth  of  the  Spirit,  the 
water  of  life,  the  bread  of  life  from  heaven,  about 
the  relation  of  the  eternal  and  only  begotten  Son  to 
the  Father,  to  the  world,  and  to  believers,  the  mis- 
sion of  the  Holy  Spirit,  the  promise  of  many  man- 
sions in  heaven,  the  farewell  to  J:he  disciples,  and  at 
last  that  sacerdotal  prayer  which  brings  us  nearest 
to  the  throne  and  the  beating  heart  of  God."  ^^ 

This  Gospel  is  the  divinest  of  them  all,  and  has 
well  been  called  ''the  heart  of  Jesus,"  Schleier- 
macher  has  said  that  it  is  the  Gospel  which  authenti- 
cates itself  to  the  inner  perception  as  the  truest 
portrait  of  Christ.  It  presents  the  Saviour  as  He 
appeared  to  the  man  whose  nature  enabled  him  to 
come  into  the  most  sympathetic  touch  with  Him. 
No  one  was  better  qualified  than  the  disciple  whom 
Jesus  loved,  and  who  leaned  on  His  bosom,  to  place 
this  divine  capstone  to  the  four-fold  Gospel.  His 
deeply  intuitive  and  keenly  perceptive  nature  gave 
him  an  insight  into  the  character  of  the  Lord  that 
none  of  the  rest  had.  He  knew  Jesus  better  than 
all  others  did.  And  because  of  these  facts,  there 
was  no  other  person  that  could  compose  a  Gospel 
that  was  better  adapted  for  the  needs  of  the  times 
in  which  it  was  written.  There  was  a  danger  that 
in  the  misty  speculations  of  the  latter  part  of  the 
first  century,  the  real  personality  and  actual  exis- 
tence of  Christ  should  be  lost  sight  of  It  was  John's 
task  to  in  a  measure  restore  that  fading  personality 
and  make  Him  real  to  the  faith  of  the  world.  "  It  is 
most  instructive  and  impressive  to  consfder  how 
John,  the  one  most  intimate  with  the  Master  in   His 

seSchaff's  History  of  the  Christian  Church,  Vol.  I.,  p.  677. 


72  THE  GOSPEL 

earthly  life,  was  left  to  turn  the  mind  of  the  new 
generation  back  to  the  life  that  was  manifested,  and 
to  testify  to  its  reality.  The  thought  of  men  about 
Christ  had  been  growing  in  elevation,  as  was  fitting 
and  right ;  but  it  had  been  growing  away  from  the 
human  life.  Even  that,  perhaps,  was  for  a  time  best ; 
but  now  John  writes  to  bring  the  higher  thought  to 
which  men's  faith  had  attained,  back  to  the  earthly 
life  that  they  were  forgetting,  and  show  them  that 
their  highest  thought  could  not  overpass  the  word 
there  uttered,  and  that  the  thought  was  never  to  be 
separated  from  the  life."^^ 

**  With  the  simplicity  in  style  and  diction,  and 
even  in  the  thoughts  and  sentiments  of  the  Johan- 
nine  writings,  there  is  combined  a  real  profundity 
which  no  human  intellect  can  fathom.  The  Fourth 
Gospel  is  especially  remarkable  for  its  depth  ;  it  has 
been  well  called  by  the  Fathers  *  the  spiritual  Gos- 
pel/ as  compared  with  the  Synoptical  Gospels.  It 
opens  the  deepest  recesses  of  the  spiritual  life  ;  it 
discloses  the  very  heart  of  the  incarnate  God  ;  it  re- 
veals the  Divine  human  nature  which  Christ  pos- 
sessed ;  it  lifts  the  veil  and  lets  us  see  into  the  holy 
of  holies.  The  two  preponderating  ideas  are  life 
and  light,  and  these  are  embodied  in  Christ :  He  is 
at  once  the  Life  and  the  Light  of  men,  the  source  of 
all  spiritual  life,  and  the  essence  of  all  spiritual  truth, 
the  sun  of  the  moral  universe.  The  writings  of 
John  may  be  compared  to  a  well  of  water,  so  clear 
and  sparkling  that  at  first  one  thinks  he  sees  to  the 
bottom  ;  but  that  well  is  so  deep,  that  the  more  one 
gazes  into  it,  the  deeper  does  it  appear,  and  no  one 

37 Professor  Porter  in  the  S.  S.  Times,  Jan.,  1892. 


ACCORDING  TO  JOHN.  73 

has  yet  been  able  to  fathom  it."^^  Dr.  Storrs  writes : 
"It  was  an  original,  self-moulded  Gospel,  inspired 
by  the  Spirit,  but  dependent  on  no  other.  What 
he  wrote  came  from  his  own  mind,  it  came  with  a 
gush.  It  is  the  most  profoundly  individual  book, 
we  may  say,  in  all  the  Scriptures.  It  is  like  the 
'seamless  garment  of  the  Lord,'  one  has  said,  so 
thoroughly  interwoven,  so  glistening  with  celestial 
gold.  I  should  rather  say,  it  is  like  the  sudden  gush 
of  the  gold,  long  fused  and  simmering  in  the  furnace, 
until  all  dross  has  vanished  from  it,  and  all  impurity 
has  been  cleansed  away,  which,  at  last,  when  the 
door  is  opened,  rushes  forth,  glowing,  incandescent, 
streaming  with  light,  and  precious  beyond  estimate 
and  compare.  So  came  the  Gospel  from  the  heart 
which  had  held  it  so  intimately  and  so  long,  and 
which  spoke  it  at  last,  to  be  henceforth  the  inestim- 
able possession  of  the  world  forever.  "^^ 

^^Gloag's  Johannine  Writings,  p.  73. 
39  Lectures  on  the  N.  T.,  Amer.  Tr.  Soc. 


CHAPTER   IV. 

The  Acts  of  the  Apostles. 

The  title  of  this  book,  as  thus  given,  is  not 
strictly  accurate,  for  it  is  actually  occupied  with  parts 
of  the  history  of  only  two  of  the  Apostles,  Peter 
and  Paul.  When  this  book  was  first  sent  by  its 
author  to  Theophilus,  to  whom  it  is  addressed,  it 
doubtless  had  no  title.  Its  opening  words  show  that 
the  author  regarded  it  as  a  continuation  of  the  his- 
tory he  had  given  in  the  Third  Gospel.  It  is  distin- 
guished from  that  book,  which  is  here  called  the 
"former  treatise."  How  early  in  history  the  title  we 
now  have  prefixed  to  the  book,  came  into  existence 
we  cannot  tell,  but  it  was  probably  at  a  very  early 
date.  Codex  Vaticanus  calls  it  "Acts  of  Apostles," 
and  Codex  Sinaiticus  makes  the  title  still  shorter, 
and  briefly  names  it  "  Acts." 

/.    Canonicity. 

A  historical  book  such  as  this  is,  was  not  likely  to 
be  quoted  as  often  as  the  Epistles,  but  still  we  can 
find  many  external  testimonies  to  its  early  existence 
and  use.  Polycarp  (ii6)  quotes  it.  In  the  Epistle 
to  Diognetus  (117)  there  are  coincidences  of  lan- 
guage more  or  less  marked.  Hermas  (140-150)  has 
some  probable  allusions  to  it.  Hegesippus  (157-176) 
"  does  not  formally  quote  it,  but  he  has  forms  of  ex- 
pressions corresponding  to  passages  in  the  Acts 
[74] 


THE  ACTS  OF  THE  APOSTLES.  75 

which  cannot  be  attributed  to  chance."  It  is  named 
in  the  Muratori  Canon  (170).  Indisputable  resem- 
blances to  it  are  to  be  found  in  the  Letter  from  the 
Churches  of  Lyons  and  Vienne  (177).  The  Syriac 
(160)  and  Old  Latin  (170)  Versions  contain  it.  And 
Irenaeus  (175),  Tertullian  (190),  and  Clement  of  Alex- 
andria (195)  quote  it  by  name.  These  testimonies 
are  sufficient  to  show  its  acceptance  from  the  early 
days  of  the  Church. 

It  was  rejected,  however,  by  some,  but  by  these 
for  a  reason,  inasmuch  as  they  were  all  heretics. 
Professor  Charteris  writes,  "  The  Manicheans  ob- 
jected to  it  because  of  its  account  of  the  coming  of 
the  Holy  Ghost.  The  Marcionites  could  not  accept 
it  because  of  its  testimony  to  the  God  of  Creation 
being  the  Father  of  Christ  Jesus.  The  Ebionites  re- 
jected it  because  of  its  recording  the  admission  of 
Gentiles  into  the  Church  without  circumcision  ;  the 
Severians  would  not  have  Paul's  Epistles  or  the  Acts 
of  the  Apostles  because  these  books  were  in  conflict 
with  their  ascetic  principles."^ 

The  authenticity  of  the  book  is  strongly  borne 
out  by  an  examination  of  the  speeches  recorded  in 
it.  Paley  in  his  Horco  PaiilincB  has  constructed  an 
unanswerable  argument  in  favor  of  the  accuracy  of 
the  historical  references  of  the  book  by  comparing 
them  with  those  of  the  Pauline  Epistles.  He  proves 
conclusively  that  the  Acts  harmonizes  with  the 
Epistles,  and  he  demonstrates  the  accuracy  of  the 
former  in  its  historical  allusions  to  events  in  the 
life  of  Paul.  Rationalistic  critics  have  done  their 
utmost  to  convict  the  book  of  inaccuracies  and  ab- 

1  Charteris'  Canonicity,  p.  206,  note. 


76  fHE  ACTS 

solute  discrepancies,  but  they  have  failed  in  their 
efforts.  I  believe  that  one  certain  case  of  inaccu- 
racy in  the  statements  of  the  book  has  yet  to  be 
proven.  There  are  undesigned  coincidences  be- 
tween the  Acts  and  the  Pauline  Epistles  that  cer- 
tainly demonstrate  the  authenticity  of  the  former. 
Davidson  writes,  "  We  hesitate  not  to  assert  that 
the  idea  of  the  book  being  fabricated  by  a  later 
unknown  writer,  with  whatever  motive  he  set  about 
the  task,  involves  the  improbabky  not  to  say  the 
impossible  at  QY^ry  step.  .  .  .  The  wakefulness  and 
talents  of  the  person  who  palmed  the  history  on 
his  generation  as  the  authentic  production  of  Paul's 
companion,  must  have  been  extraordinary.  Not  so 
constructed  are  the  forgeries  of  that  period.  They 
have  therefore  been  detected  long  ago  by  the  test 
of  fair  criticism.  But  the  book  of  Acts  has  stood 
the  test  unshaken.  .  .  .  We  are  confident  that  the 
credibility  of  the  Acts  will  be  universally  acknowl- 
edged long  after  the  negative  criticism  has  vanished 
away  like  every  temporary  extravagance  of  unbridled 
reason,  or  rather  of  unbridled  scepticism."^ 

//.    The  AiitJiorship  of  the  Book. 

Without  a  dissenting  voice  the  testimony  of  the 
early  Church  is  in  favor  of  the  Evangelist  Luke,  as 
the  author  of  this  book.  The  book  *'  announces  it- 
self as  the  second  work  of  the  same  author  who 
wrote  the  Gospel  dedicated  to  Theophilus.  The 
Acts  of  the  Apostles  is  therefore  justly  considered 
as  a  portion  of  the  historical  Avork  of  Luke,  follow- 
ing up  that    Gospel,  and    continuing  the   history  of 

2 Davidson's  Introd.,  ist  Ed.,  Vol.  II.,  p.  51. 


OF  THE  APOSTLES.  77 

early  Christianity  from  the  ascension  of  Christ  to  the 
captivity  of  Paul  at  Rome  ;  and  no  other  but  Luke 
is  named  by  the  ancient  orthodox  Church  as  the 
author  of  the  book,  which  is  included  by  Eusebius 
among  the  Undisputed  Books.  ...  So  early  an 
ecclesiastical  recognition  of  the  canonicity  of  the  book 
would  be  inexplicable,  if  the  teachers  of  the  church 
had  not  from  the  very  first  recognized  it  as  a  second 
work  of  Luke,  to  which,  as  well  as  to  the  Gospel,  apos- 
tolic authority  belonged."*  Bleek  writing  in  regard 
tc  the  authorship  of  the  two  books,  says,  '^  Both  works 
not  only  breathe  throughout  the  same  spirit,  but  ex- 
hibit the  same  phraseology.  Now,  that  the  writer 
was  Luke,  the  friend  of  Paul,  rests  as  to  both  the 
Acts  and  the  Gospel  of  Luke  on  ecclesiastical  tradi- 
tion, which  we  have  no  just  grounds  to  doubt.  It  is 
true  Luke  is  not  mentioned  as  the  author  till  towards 
the  close  of  the  second  century,  first  by  Irenaeus, 
and  then  by  Clemens  Alexandrinus,  Tertullian,  and 
others,  but  then  these  writers  state  the  fact  so  unhes- 
itatingly, not  even  stopping  to  discuss  it,  that  it  is 
quite  clear  that  they  must  have  known  it  to  be  uni- 
versally acknowledged  by  the  Church  in  their  day, 
and  derived  from  a  still  older  ecclesiastical  tradition. 
No  doubt,  from  the  very  first,  ever  since  the  works 
had  come  before  the  general  public,  this  had  been 
the  common  opinion  in  the  Church."* 

Li  support  of  this  traditional  belief,  it  being 
assumed  that  Luke  was  the  author  of  the  Third 
Gospel,  the  following  reasons  may  be  urged,  namely: 
(i.)  It  was  the  unhesitating  and  unanimous  beliei 

2  Meyer  on  Acts,  Introd. 

*Bleek's  N.  T.  Introd.,  Vol.  I.,  ^.  368. 


7B  THE  ACTS 

of  the  early  Church.  (2.)  The  similarity  of  the 
inscription,  character,  and  style  of  this  book  to  the 
Third  Gospel.  (3.)  The  similarity  of  language  be- 
tween the  two  books,  over  fifty  words  being  common 
to  them  that  are  not  used  elsewhere  in  the  New 
Testament.  (4.)  The  manifest  connection  between 
the  two  books,  this  being  the  continuation  of  the 
history  given  in  the  Third  Gospel. 

At  Acts  16 :  10  the  author  became  a  member  of 
the  missionary  band,  for  the  narrative  continues 
from  that  point  in  the  first  person  plural.  Luke 
consequently  joined  Paul's  company,  when  the  Apos- 
tle reached  Troas  on  his  second  missionary  journey. 
A  short  time  previous  to  this,  Paul  had  been  de- 
tained by  sickness  in  Galatia  (Gal.  4:  13),  and  it  is 
not  improbable  that  Luke  became  one  of  the  mis- 
sionary band  in  order  that  he  as  a  physician  might 
attend  to  the  needs  of  the  Apostle,  recovering  from 
his  recent  sickness.  From  Troas  they  went  to- 
gether to  Philippi,  and  there  Luke  remained  until 
Paul  came  again  to  that  city  on  his  third  missionary 
journey  about  six  years  later.  This  is  proven  by 
the  fact  that  from  16 :  19  to  20:  5  the  narrative  con- 
tinues in  the  third  person,  but  at  20 :  5  the  first  per- 
son again  appears,  indicating  that  the  writer  had 
again  joined  company  with  the  Apostle.  From  this 
point  on,  these  "we-passages  "  predominate  in  the 
narrative. 

An  effort  has  been  made  to  prove  that  the  author 
of  these  "  we-passages  "  was  Timothy  or  Silas.  But 
in  20:  4,  5  it  is  evident  that  Timothy  is  distinguished 
from  the  writer,  while  there  is  no  evidence  that 
Silas  was   ever  associated  again  with  the  Apostle 


OF  THE  APOSTLES.  79 

after  the  residence  of  eighteen  months  in  Corinth 
from  52  to  53  A.  D.  If  Timothy  was  the  author  of 
these  passages,  it  is  hard  to  understand  why  they 
do  not  begin  at  16  : 4,  where  Timothy  became  one 
of  the  companions  of  Paul  in  his  missionary  work  ; 
and  there  is  also  need  for  explaining  why  the  nar- 
rative does  not  continue  in  the  first  person  at  18  :  5, 
when  Timothy  joined  Paul  at  Corinth.  On  the 
other  hand,  there  is  no  real  reason  why  Luke  was 
not  the  author  of  these  passages  himself  Silas  and 
Timothy  being  ruled  out,  Luke  alone  remains  as  the 
probable,  or  even  possible  author.  Desperate  efforts 
have  been  made  by  rationalistic  critics  to  place  this 
book  much  later  in  history  than  the  time  of  Luke. 
Its  historicity  has  been  openly  assailed  by  some, 
and  all  sorts  of  sinister  motives  have  been  attributed 
to  its  assumed  compiler  of  the  second  century. 
Some,  admitting  that  Luke  may  have  been  the 
author  of  the  *'  we-passages,"  still  contend  that  a 
later  editor  brought  the  book  into  its  present 
shape.  Professor  Dods  writes,  "  Those  who  still 
maintain  that  the  book  was  written  in  the  second 
century  are  placed  in  the  awkward  predicament  of 
being  obliged  to  hold  that  the  skillful  literary  hand 
which  is  discernible  throughout,  incorporated  and 
re-wrote  these  sections  so  clumsily  as  not  even  to 
alter  the  'we'  of  his  sources  into  ^they.'  This  is 
too  much  for  literary  critics  like  Renan,  who  frankly 
declares  that  such  an  explanation  is  inadmissible, 
and  that  although  a  ruder  compiler  would  have  left 
the  'we*  unaltered,  it  is  not  possible  to  ascribe  such 
clumsiness  to  the  writer  of  ^f/i".  'We  are  therefore 
irresistibly  led  to  the  conclusion  that  he  who  wrote 


80  THE  ACTS 

the  latter  part  of  the  work  wrote  also  the  former, 
and  that  the  writer  of  the  whole  is  he  who  says, 
"we"  in  the  sections  alluded  to.'"^  Meyer  says, 
"  The  we-narrative,  with  its  vivid  and  direct  im- 
press of  personal  participation,  always  remains  a 
strong  testimony  in  favor  of  a  companion  of  the 
Apostle  as  the  author  of  the  whole  book,  of  which 
that  narrative  is  a  part ;  to  separate  the  subject  of 
that  narrative  from  the  author  of  the  whole,  is  a 
procedure  of  sceptical  caprice."^ 

This  book  and  the  Third  Gospel  stand  or  fall  to- 
gether. All  that  has  been  advanced  in  favor  of  the 
Lucan  authorship  of  that  Gospel  holds  good  to  prove 
the  same  of  this  book.  And  so  far  nothing  has  been 
developed  that  can  in  any  way  rob  Luke  of  the 
honor  of  having  written  this  book  of  the  Acts,  as  a 
continuation  of  the  historical  work  he  had  done  in 
the  Third  Gospel. 

///.   The  Sources  of  the  Book, 

In  the  introductory  words  to  his  Gospel,  Luke 
lays  down  the  method  of  his  procedure  in  compil- 
ing the  history  contained  in  that  book.  He  had 
carefully  gathered  together  all  available  material, 
whether  in  the  form  of  short  fragmentary  written 
notes,  or  the  oral  testimony  of  eye-witnesses  of  the 
events  of  the  Gospel  history.  This  material  he  had 
carefully  sifted  and  tested,  before  he  had  proceeded 
to  write  his  memoir  of  Christ,  upon  which  Theophi- 
lus  might  rely,  as  he  says,  *'  that  thou  mightest  know 
the  certainty  of  those  things  wherein  thou  hast  been 
instructed."     The  same  plan  was  doubtless  pursued 

Bpods'  N.  T.  Introd.,  p.  65.  ^ Meyer  on  Acts,  p.  7. 


OF  THE  APOSTLES.  81 

in  the  composition  of  this  book,  with  this  difference 
however,  that  he  was  an  eye-witness  himself  of  a  good 
deal  tha,t  is  recorded  in  it.  That  he  was  dependent 
on  documents  for  some  parts  of  this  work  is  undeni- 
able when  close  examination  is  made.  Very  prob- 
ably some  of  the  speeches  recorded,  especially  of 
Peter,  had  been  committed  to  writing. 

There  are  1007  verses  in  this  book.  Of  these  the 
"  we-passages"  include  318  ;  while  366  others  recount 
the  acts  and  words  of  Paul,  or  scenes  which  he  un- 
doubtedly witnessed,  as,  e.  g.y  the  trial,  defense,  and 
death  of  Stephen.  To  these  we  may  add  the  36 
verses  (8  :  5-40).  which  recount  the  evangelistic  tour 
of  Philip,  the  account  of  which  Luke  probably  ob- 
tained while  he  was  lodging  at  the  house  of  Philip 
in  Caesarea  (21  :8-io),  as  well  as  the  four  introduc- 
tory verses.  Adding  these  up,  we  can  readily  see 
that  Luke  from  his  own  experience,  and  from  what 
he  could  learn  from  Paul  and  Philip,  could  write  724 
verses,  or  over  seven-tenths  of  the  whole  book,  with- 
out having  recourse  to  any  documents.  There  re- 
main but  283  verses  to  be  accounted  for,  and  these 
verses  relate  the  acts  and  words  of  Peter,  all  of  which 
may  have  been  preserved  in  some  written  form  to 
which  the  historian  had  access.  From  thiSj  it  is 
evident  that  the  sources  of  the  information  con- 
tained in  the  book  were  written  records,  oral  testi- 
mony, and  personal  knowledge.  ^ 

Efforts  have  been  made  to  prove  that  the  book 
as  it  stands  is  not  the  work  of  one  hand,  but  at  least 
of  two.     It  is  admitted  that  there  are  some  differ- 

'  The  passages  for  which  he  was  dependent  on  some  otner  source 
than  Paul  and  Philip  are  I  :  5-6  :  8  ;  9  :  32-1 1  :  18  ;  12  :  1-23. 
6 


82  THE  ACTS 

ences  in  style  between  the  first  part  of  the  book  and 
the  latter,  but  the  fact  that  he  was  more  dependent 
on  documentary  sources  for  the  first  part  than 
for  the  latter  will  in  large  part  account  for  this. 
But  the  vocabulary  of  words  in  the  two  parts  is 
about  the  same.  The  Lucan  style  predominates  the 
whole  ;  so  much  so,  that  most  scholars  pronounce 
against  the  idea  that  Luke  did  not  write  both  parts. 

IV.   The  Occasion  and  Object  of  the  Book. 

The  occasion  of  the  book  is  very  manifest.  Luke 
had  composed  his  Gospel  for  the  instruction  of 
Theophilus,  and  for  the  confirmation  of  his  faith, 
"  that  thou  mightest  know  the  certainty  of  those 
things  wherein  thou  hast  been  instructed "  (Luke 
I  :  4).  The  same  writer  continues  that  Gospel  his- 
tory by  adding  this  second  treatise,  containing  a 
history  of  the  further  progress  of  Christianity.  It 
is  closely  linked  to  the  "  former  treatise,"  and  was 
occasioned  by  the  desire  to  give  Theophilus  further 
instruction. 

As  to  the  object  of  the  book  much  has  been 
written.  The  Tuebingen  School  of  critics  in  its 
leading  representatives  has  tenaciously  clung  to  the 
theory  of  a  hostility  between  Peter  and  Paul.  They 
claim  that  in  the  early  Church  there  were  two  fac- 
tions irreconcilably  hostile  to  each  other,  the  one 
led  by  Peter,  representing  the  Jewish  element  in  the 
Church,  and  the  other  headed  by  Paul  who  repre- 
sented the  Gentile  element.  Now  these  critics 
boldly  claim  that  the  purpose  of  this  book  was  iren- 
ical,  that  it  attempts  to  minify  these  supposed  differ- 


OF  THE  APOSTLES.  83 

ences  between  the  two  great  Apostles  and  their  re- 
spective adherents.  It  is  held  that  the  writer  of  this 
book  was  a  Paulinist  of  a  mild  type,  whose  desire  it 
was  to  show  that  there  was  not  after  all  so  much 
difference  between  Peter  and  Paul.  Schnecken- 
burger  holds  that  the  book  was  primarily  written  for 
Jewish  Christians  in  order  to  remove  from  their 
minds  their  prejudices  against  Paul  and  his  followers. 
Zeller  says,  "  The  work  is  a  conciliatory  essay  offered 
by  a  member  of  the  Pauline  party  to  the  Judaizers, 
with  a  view  of  obtaining  the  recognition  of  Gentile 
Christianity  by  concessions  to  Judaism,  and  thus  ex- 
erting an  influence  on  both  parties."  It  is  but  just 
to  add  that  an  increasing  number  of  critics,  even 
those  of  a  bold  type,  reject  this  theory.  Schenkel,  a 
critic  who  can  never  be  accused  of  having  a  conserv- 
ative bias,  says,  ''  Having  never  been  able  to  con- 
vince myself  of  the  sheer  opposition  between  Paulin- 
ism  and  Petrinism,  it  has  also  never  been  possible 
for  me  to  get  a  credible  conception  of  a  reconcilia- 
tion effected  by  means  of  a  literature  sailing  between 
the  contending  parties  under  false  colors.  In  re- 
spect to  the  Acts  of  the  Apostles  in  particular,  I 
have  been  led  in  part  to  different  results  from  those 
represented  by  the  modern  critical  school.  I  have 
been  forced  to  the  conviction  that  it  is  a  far  more 
trustworthy  source  of  information  than  is  commonly 
allowed  on  the  part  of  modern  criticism."*  In  refer- 
ence to  the  idea  put  forth  by  some,  that  this  book  is 
really  a  defense  of  the  Apostle  Paul  against  the  at- 
tacks of  the  Jewish  party,  Weiss  writes,   **  That  the 

8  Quoted  by  Dods'  N.  T.  Introd.,  p.  70. 


84  THE  ACTS 

Apostle's  defense  against  Jewish-Christian  attacks 
was  in  any  sense  the  object  of  the  work,  cannot  be 
proved."* 

Of  course  these  theories,  and  there  are  many  dif- 
ferent combinations  of  them,  necessitate  the  denial 
of  the  Lucan  authorship  of  the  book,  because  of  its 
assumed  late  origin.  These  theories  also  impugn 
the  historical  character  of  the  book,  and  do  not  hesi- 
tate to  charge  the  writer  with  having  manufactured 
history  to  suit  his  purpose.  In  opposition  to  this 
whole  theory  that  the  purpose  of  the  book  jvas  to 
fecoiicile  deep-seated  differences  b§V^ 
ties,  and  therefore  distorted  the  history  to  that  end, 
the  following  arguments  may  be  noted  :  (i.)  It  is 
utterly  irreconcilable  with  the  unanimousjt^timony 
and  belief  of  the  early  Church.  (2.)  It  is  a  desper- 
ate makeshift  of  destructive  criticism  to  bolster  up 
a  certain  theory^forjhe  reconstruction  of  the  history 
"oiTthe  basis  of  a  system  of  philosophy.  (3.)  It  as- 
sumes a  cunning  on  the  part  of , the. ^author  of  the 
book  that  is  thoFoughly  inconsistent  with  its  char- 
acter. (4.)  Its  advocates  *'  are  obliged,  in  support- 
ing it,  to  have  recourse  to  utterly  unnatural  or 
decidedjy  false  combinations,  passing  over  in  com-^ 
plete  silence  much  in  the  book  that  is  quite  oppose^ql 
to  their  assumptions."  (5.)  It  is  certainly  revolting 
to__the  Christian  conscience,  because  it  saps  the 
b^ok  of  its  hi^h_ jnoral  character^  and  reduces  it  to 
the^level  of  cunning  and  deceit. 

Dr.  Schaff  writes,  The  book  "represents  the  origin 
and  progress  of  Christianity  from  the  capital  of  Juda- 
ism to  the  capital  of  heathenism.     It  is  the  history 

^Weiss'  Introd.,  Vol.  II.,  p.  324. 


OF  THE  APOSTLES.  85 

of  the  planting  of  the  Church  among  the  Jews  by 
Peter,  and  among  the  Gentiles  by  Paul.  Its  theme 
is  expressed  in  the  promise  of  the  risen  Christ  to 
His  disciples  (i  :  8)  :  'Ye  shall  receive  power,  when 
the  Holy  Ghost  is  come  upon  you  (chap.  2) :  and  ye 
shall  be  my  witnesses  both  in  Jerusalem  (qhaps. 
3-7)  ;  and  in  all  Judea  and  Samaria  (chaps.  8-12)  ; 
and  unto  the  uttermost  part  of  the  earth  '  (chaps. 
13-28).  The  Gospel  of  Luke,  which  is  the  Pauline 
Gospel,  laid  the  foundation  by  showing  how  salva- 
tion, coming  from  the  Jews  and  opposed  by  the 
Jews,  was  intended  for  all  men,  Samaritans  and 
Gentiles.  The  Acts  exhibits  the  progress  of  the 
Church  from  and  among  the  Jews  to  the  Gentiles 
by  the  ministry  of  Peter,  then  of  Stephen,  then  of 
Philip  in  Samaria,  then  of  Peter  again  in  the  con- 
version of  Cornelius,  and  at  last  by  the  labors  of 
Paul  and  his  companions."^" 

V.  Contents, 

I.   Introduction,     i  :  1-3. 
II.   The  founding  of  the   Christian  Church  by  the 
out-pouring   of  the    Spirit   on    Pentecost,   in- 
cluding   the    preparation   of  the   disciples  for 
the  same,     i  14-2  :  47. 

III.  The  development  and  history  of  the  Church  in 

Jerusalem.     3  :  1-7  :  60. 

IV.  The    spread  of  the    Church    throughout    Judea 

and  Samaria.     8:1-12:25. 
V.  The  spread  of  the  Church  among  the  Gentiles 
by   the    great    missionary    enterprises    under 
Paul.     13  :  1-28  :  31. 

lOSchafE's  History  of  the  Christian  Church,  Vol.  I.,  p.  726. 


THE  ACTS  OF  THE  APOSTLES, 


VI.  Date  and  Place  of  Composition, 

The  Third  Gospel  has  already  been  dated  between 
58  and  60  A.  D.,  and  during  the  time  of  the  Caesarean 
imprisonment.  This  book  followed  it  at  no  very- 
great  interval  of  time.  It  must  have  been  written 
before  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem,  or  even  the  lib- 
eration of  Paul  from  his  Roman  imprisonment,  since 
neither  of  these  events  is  mentioned  in  it.  Paul 
was  brought  to  Rome  as  a  prisoner  in  the  spring  of 
61  A.  D.,  and  according  to  this  book,  he  then  dwelt 
in  his  own  hired  house  for  two  years.  At  the  time 
of  the  composition  of  this  book,  then,  the  Apostle 
had  been  a  prisoner  for  two  years.  That  seems  to 
fix  the  date  of  it  without  any  room  for  question.  It 
was  written  during  the  spring  of  63  A.  D.,  or  at  least 
was  finished  about  that  time. 

The  book  ends  abruptly,  possibly  because  its 
author  was  suddenly  called  away  from  the  city  to 
more  active  service  in  some  other  part  of  the  Church, 
or,  it  may  be  that  the  change  in  the  affairs  of  the 
Apostle  upon  the  death  of  Burrhus,  and  the  acces- 
sion of  Tigellinus  to  the  prefectship  of  the  Praetor- 
ian Cohorts,  compelled  his  withdrawal  from  Rome. 
But  however  that  may  have  been,  there  can  be  but 
little  question  but  that  the  spring  of  63  A.  D.  marks 
the  time  of  the  composition  of  the  Acts.  The  place 
of  composition  was  Rome. 


CHAPTER  y. 

The  Pauline  Epistles —General 
Introduction. 

/.   The  Life  and  Character  of  Paul  the  Apostle. 

It  does  not  lie  within  the  scope  of  this  work  to 
give  a  detailed  history  of  the  life  of  this  remarkable 
man.  Paul,  or  Saul  as  he  was  known  until  he  ar- 
rived at  Cyprus  on  his  first  missionary  journey, 
was  born  at  Tarsus,  the  capital  of  the  province  of 
Cilicia.  His  parents  were  Jews,  and  his  father  pos- 
sessed the  rights  of  Roman  citizenship.  The  early 
days  of  Saul  were  spent  in  his  native  city,  and  in 
all  probability  he  received  a  part  of  his  education 
there.  Tarsus  was  one  of  the  great  educational 
centers,  and  in  the  halls  of  its  famous  university 
many  of  the  greatest  men  of  that  period  could  be 
heard.  How  long  Saul  lived  in  Tarsus  we  do  not 
know,  but  at  an  early  age  he  was  sent  to  Jerusalem 
to  complete  his  education.  As  he  makes  no  refer- 
ence to  his  parents  as  living,  it  is  not  improbable 
that  he  was  left  an  orphan  in  childhood.  He  had  a 
sister  living  in  Jerusalem  (Acts  23  :  16),  and  one  of 
the  reasons  of  his  removal  to  that  city  from  Tarsus 
may  have  been  to  make  his  home  with  this  sister. 
The  principal  reason,  however,  was  that  he  might 
receive  instruction  from  some  of  the  rabbis  of  the 


88  THE  PAULINE  EPISTLES. 

holy  city.  Gamaliel  was  the  rabbi  to  whom  the 
care  of  instructing  Saul  was  committed.  It  was 
from  this  noted  doctor  of  the  law  that  he  received 
his  rabbinical  training.  He  tells  us  that  he  was 
brought  up  in  Jerusalem,  that  he  was  "taught  ac- 
cording to  the  perfect  manner  of  the  law  of  the 
fathers,  and  was  zealous  toward  God." 

The  first  appearance  of  Saul  in  the  apostolic  his- 
tory is  in  connection  with  the  death  of  the  proto- 
martyr  Stephen.  Canon  Farrar  writes  :  ''  It  is  the 
first  appearance  in  history  of  a  name  destined  from 
that  day  forward  to  be  memorable  in  the  annals  of 
the  world.  And  how  sad  an  allusion  !  He  stands, 
not  indeed  actively  engaged  in  the  work  of  death, 
but  keeping  the  clothes,  consenting  to  the  violence, 
of  those  who,  in  this  brutal  manner,  dimmed  in  blood 
the  light  upon  a  face  which  had  been  radiant  as  that 
of  an  angel  with  faith  and  love."  This  murder  of 
Stephen  was  the  signal  for  a  general  outburst  of  per- 
secutions against  the  Christians  in  and  around  Jeru- 
salem. The  fiery  young  disciple  of  Judaism  leaped 
into  prominence,  and  naturally  became  a  leader  in 
the  onslaughts  made  on  the  followers  of  Christ.  So 
fierce  were  these  assaults  that  Jerusalem  was  speedily 
emptied  of  their  victims.  In  his  zeal  for  what  he 
thought  was  God's  service,  Saul,  at  his  own  request, 
was  commissioned  by  Theophilus,  the  cruel  high 
priest,  to  go  as  far  as  Damascus,  for  the  purpose  of 
hunting  down  the  heretics.  It  was  as  he  was  near- 
ing  Damascus  that  he  was  stricken  down  by  Him 
whose  cause  he  was  assailing.  In  a  moment  the 
young  Cilician  zealot  was  converted,  and  all  the  en- 


GENERAL  INTRODUCTION.  89 

ergies  of  his  life  were  turned  into  the  service  of  Jesus 
of  Nazareth. 

The  persecutor  became  the  persecuted.  After  a 
few  days  Saul  withdrew  from  Damascus,  and  went 
into  Arabia,  where  he  spent  three  years  in  seclusion. 
That  time  was  unquestionably  spent  in  preparation 
under  the  instruction  of  the  Spirit  for  his  new  work. 
Returning  at  length  to  Damascus,  he  preached  Christ, 
but  he  was  not  permitted  to  remain  there.  The 
Jews,  whose  champion  he  had  been,  conspired  against 
his  life,  and  he  fled  to  Jerusalem.  His  stay  in  the 
holy  city  was  only  of  fifteen  days'  duration  (Gal.  i  : 
i8).  There  also  persecution  arose  against  him,  and 
he  retired  to  his  old  home  in  Cilicia  (Acts  9  :  29,  30). 
It  was  work  for  his  Redeemer  doubtless  that  occu- 
pied his  attention  there,  until  he  was  summoned  by 
Barnabas  to  assist  in  the  work  at  Syrian  Antioch. 
At  that  place,  the  time  of  waiting  and  preparation 
being  over,  he  began  his  life  of  aggressive  service  for 
Christ.  At  the  end  of  about  a  year's  time,  Saul  was 
called  by  the  Holy  Spirit  to  go  forth  as  the  great 
pioneer  missionary  of  the  Christian  Church. 

In  company  with  Barnabas  and  Mark,  he  set  out, 
on  his  First  Missionary  Journey.  Leaving  Antioch 
they  went  by  way  of  Seleucia  to  the  island  of  Cyprus. 
After  traversing  the  length  of  that  island,  they 
crossed  over  to  the  mainland  of  Asia  Minor,  land- 
ing at  Perga  in  Pamphylia.  On  this  journey  they 
preached  the  Gospel  and  established  churches  in 
in  Pisidian  Antioch,  Iconium,  Lystra,  and  Derbe. 
Retracing  their  steps,  they  returned  to  Syrian  An- 
tioch,  thus   ending   that    first    missionary  journey. 


90  THE  PAULINE  EPISTLES. 

From  Antioch,  Saul,  now  known  as  Paul,  and  having 
become  the  leader  in  this  missionary  work,  went  to 
Jerusalem  to  attend  the  Council  held  in  that  city  in 
50  A.  D., —  a  conference  called  together  to  settle  the 
controversy  that  had  arisen  in  regard  to  the  Jewish 
rites  and  their  relation  to  the  Gentiles.  At  the 
conclusion  of  this  Council  the  Apostle  returned  to 
Antioch. 

In  a  short  time  Paul  taking  Silas  with  him  began 
his  Second  Missionary  Journey.  He  traveled  North- 
west by  land,  revisiting  the  disciples  at  Derbe, 
Lystra,  Iconium,  and  Pisidian  Antioch.  At  Lys- 
tra,  Timothy  joined  the  missionary  band.  Passing 
through  Phrygia  and  Galatia,  in  which  latter  country 
they  were  detained  longer  than  they  had  expected 
by  the  sickness  of  the  Apostle,  the  missionaries  guided 
by  the  Holy  Spirit  came  at  length  to  Alexandria 
Troas  on  the  ^gean  Sea,  where  Luke  the  historian 
became  one  of  their  company.  From  this  point  by 
divine  direction,  they  crossed  over  the  sea  to  Phil- 
ippi.  At  this  important  city  they  established  a 
church.  Passing  on  through  Amphipolis  and  Apol- 
lonia,  they  established  churches  in  Thessalonica  and 
Berea.  From  the  latter  point  Paul  went  by  sea  to 
Athens,  and  from  thence  to  Corinth,  where  he  re- 
sided for  eighteen  months  (Acts  18:  11).  At  the 
end  of  that  time  Paul  sailed  from  Corinth  to  Ephe- 
sus.  Promising  to  return  to  that  famous  city,  he 
hastened  to  Jerusalem  to  attend  the  approaching 
Feast  of  Pentecost.  After  that  Feast  the  Apostle 
came   back   once   more   to   Antioch. 

After  a  short  stay  there  the  tireless  Apostle 
started  out  on  his  Third  Missionary  Journey.     Oa 


GENERAL  INTRODUCTION.  91 

this  journey  Paul  revisited  Phrygia  and  Galatia,  and 
from  thence  he  went  to  Ephesus,  where  he  labored 
for  three  years.  From  Ephesus  he  passed  by  way 
of  Troas  into  Macedonia,  spending  the  Summer  and 
Fall  of  that  year  in  planting  the  Gospel  as  far  west 
as  Illyricum  (Rom.  15  :  19-23).  The  following  Win- 
ter was  spent  in  Corinth  (Acts  20:2).  As  soon  as 
Winter  was  past,  Paul  began  his  journey  to  Jerusa- 
lem, carrying  with  him  the  offering  that  had  been 
made  in  Macedonia  and  Achaia  for  the  poor  saints 
at  Jerusalem.  The  route  he  took  was  overland  by 
way  of  Philippi.  From  thence  crossing  over  to 
Troas,  he  made  his  journey  by  water,  touching  at 
numerous  points  on  the  way  to  Caesarea.  Going  up 
to  Jerusalem  from  Caesarea,  he  was  in  a  few  days 
arrested,  having  been  rescued  by  the  chief  captain 
Lysias  from  the  hands  of  the  mob  of  infuriated 
Jews,  who  were  bent  on  his  death. 

Because  of  the  danger  threatening  him  in  Jerusa- 
lem, the  Apostle  was  shortly  afterwards  transferred 
to  Caesarea,  where  he  passed  two  years  in  confine- 
ment as  a  prisoner  under  Felix.  Soon  after  the 
accession  of  Festus  to  the  governorship,  in  accord- 
ance with  his  appeal  to  Caesar,  Paul  was  sent  to 
Rome  to  have  his  case  judged  by  Nero.  It  was 
late  in  the  Fall  when  the  journey  to  Rome  was  be- 
gun. The  storm  that  arose  on  that  voyage  com- 
pletely wrecked  the  ship,  but  all  the  lives  on  board 
were  saved,  the  whole  party  being  cast  on  the 
island  of  Malta.  Early  the  next  Spring  Paul  was 
brought  to  Rome,  and  delivered  over  to  the  custody 
of  the  Praetorian  Prefect.  At  the  end  of  two  years, 
his  case  having  been  favorably  decided,  he  was  lib- 


92  THE  PAULINE  EPISTLES. 

erated.  As  the  history  of  the  Acts  terminates  just 
before  this  release,  we  do  not  have  it  as  our  guide 
for  the  movements  of  the  Apostle  after  that  event, 
and  we  are  dependent  on  the  references  of  the  Pas- 
toral Epistles.  From  these  we  gather  that  he  re- 
turned to  Ephesus.  After  a  time,  if  the  tradition 
be  true,  he  journeyed  as  far  west  as  Spain.  From 
Spain  he  came  back  to  Ephesus.  Ere  long  he  had 
to  take  a  trip  to  Macedonia,  but  came  back  from 
there  to  Ephesus  again.  Then  there  came  the  trip 
to  Crete  with  Titus,  and  the  Apostle  returned  once 
more  to  Ephesus.  From  Ephesus  by  way  of  Miletus 
and  Corinth,  Paul  went  to  Nicopolis  in  Epirus. 
Danger  confronting  him  at  that  place,  the  Apostle 
left  there  hurriedly  and  journeyed  to  Troas,  where 
he  left  his  cloak  and  books  and  parchment.  Ven- 
turing to  Ephesus,  he  was  arrested  and  carried  to 
Rome,  where  he  suffered  martyrdom  the  following 
Summer. 

The  accession  of  Festus  to  the  governorship  of 
Judea  in  60  A.  D,,  furnishes  a  most  important  help 
in  determining  the  dates  of  the  events  of  Paul's  life. 
Two  years  before  Festus  succeeded  Felix,  Paul  was 
arrested  in  Jerusalem  just  after  Pentecost.  The 
three  months  of  the  previous  Winter  were  spent  at 
Corinth,  Paul  having  left  Ephesus  immediately  after 
Pentecost  of  57  A.  D.  The  three  years'  residence  at 
Ephesus  carries  us  back  to  54  A.  D.,  as  the  time 
of  his  arrival  there  on  his  third  missionary  jour- 
ney. The  time  occupied  by  his  return  from  Cor- 
inth to  Jerusalem  and  Antioch,  completing  his 
second  journey,  would  be  several  months.  Pre- 
vious  to   that,  he  spent  a  year  and  a  half  at  Cor- 


GENERAL  INTRODUCTION.  93 

inth,  which  would  place  the  time  of  his  first  arrival 
at  Corinth  in  the  Fall  of  52  A.  D.  He  attended  the 
Council  of  Jerusalem  in  50  A.  D.,  and  he  dates  his 
conversion  fourteen  years  before  that  event,  that  is, 
37  A.  D.  Going  back  now  to  the  beginning  of  Festus' 
governorship,  we  find  that  Paul  was  sent  to  Rome 
shortly  after  it  began,  that  is,  late  in  60  A.  D.  He 
reached  Rome  in  the  Spring  of  the  following  year, 
and  was  released  two  years  later,  that  is,  63  A.  D. 
Nero  died  in  June  of  6Z  A.  D.,  and  Paul's  martyrdom 
probably  occurred  shortly  before  that  event. 

The  following  will  give  in  their  order  in  time  the 
chief  events  in  the  Apostle's  life. 

Conversion 37 

Return  from  Arabia 40 

Fifteen  days'  visit  in  Jerusalem 40 

Flight  to  Cilicia 40 

Went  to  Antioch 43 

First  Missionary  Journey  begun 45 

Council  at  Jerusalem 50 

Second  Missionary  Journey  begun 50 

Eighteen  months'  residence  in  Corinth 52-54 

At  Pentecost  at  Jerusalem May  31,  54 

Third  Missionary  Journey  begun Summer,  54 

Three  years  at  Ephesus Late  in  54  to  Pentecost,  57 

Three  months'  residence  in  Corinth Winter,  57-58 

Arrested  in  Jerusalem Pentecost,  58 

Prisoner  at  Caesarea 58-60 

Prisoner  at  Rome 61-63 

Period  of  freedom 63-67 

Martyrdom May,  68 

A  few  words  must  be  written  about  the  character 
of  this  great  Apostle  to  the  Gentiles.  He  was  a 
great    man    in   every   sense   of  the   word.      Canon 


94  THE  PAULINE  EPISTLES. 

Farrar  writes :  "  There  are  souls  in  which  the 
burning  heat  of  some  transfusing  purpose  calcines 
every  other  thought,  every  other  desire,  every  other 
admiration  ;  and  St.  Paul's  was  one.  His  life  was 
absorbingly,  if  not  solely  and  exclusively,  the  spirit- 
ual life  —  the  life  which  is  utterly  dead  to  every  other 
interest  of  the  groaning  and  travailing  creation,  the 
life  hid  with  Christ  in  God."^  Paul  was  always  true 
to  his  conscience,  and  his  words  to  Felix,  "  And  herein 
do  I  exercise  myself,  to  have  always  a  conscience 
void  of  offense  toward  God,  and  toward  man  "  (Acts 
24  :  16),  accurately  describe  the  man,  so  far  as  we  can 
gather  from  what  we  know  of  him  from  the  Acts  and 
from  his  own  writings.  When  he  became  a  Christian, 
he  gave  every  power  and  every  faculty  to  the  service 
of  his  Saviour.  Dr.  Stalker^  gives  as  the  elements  of 
his  character,  his  spirit  of  enterprise,  his  influence  over 
men,  his  spirit  of  unselfishness,  his  sense  of  having  a 
mission  to  fulfill,  and  his  personal  devotion  to  Christ. 
He  was  a  man  of  sincerity,  of  strong  determination 
of  will,  of  uncompromising  adherence  to  duty. 

Humility,  tenderness,  and  affection  marked  Paul's 
whole  life.  He  could  be  severe  to  the  last  extreme, 
if  occasion  called  for  it,  but  it  was  never  to  assert 
self  that  he  showed  the  depths  of  feeling  of  which 
he  was  capable.  Let  anything  appear  to  touch  the 
honor  of  the  cause  he  represented,  or  to  assail  his 
teaching,  and  the  lightning  would  flash  from  his  eye 
and  the  thunder  roll  from  his  tongue.  "  It  has 
often  been  observed  that  there  is  a  remarkable  re- 
semblance between  Paul  and  Luther.     And  certainly 

1  Life  and  Work  of  St.  Paul,  ch.  2. 

2  Life  of  St.  Paul,  ch.  7. 


GENERAL  INTRODUCTION.  95 

in  many  points  there  is  a  resemblance  :  the  same 
heroic  zeal,  the  same  decision,  the  same  sincerity, 
the  same  indefatigable  energy,  the  same  sympathy 
with  humanity,  the  same  liberality  of  mind,  actuated 
both.  But  Paul  was  a  much  higher  type  of  man 
than  the  great  Reformer :  his  unworldliness  was 
more  complete,  his  charity  was  more  universal,  his 
joyfulness  was  more  spiritual,  his  temper  was  more 
heavenly."  ^* 

//.   The  Writings  of  the  Apostle  Paul. 

We  possess  thirteen  Epistles  that  explicitly  claim 
to  be  Paul's,  and  as  such  they  have  been  received  by 
the  Church  in  all  ages.  To  these  we  must  add  the 
Epistle  to  the  Hebrews,  although  it  nowhere  claims 
to  be  Pauline.  The  thirteen  naturally  are  divided 
into  three  classes. 

1.  The  Early  Epistles,  consisting  of  First  and 
Second  Thessalonians,  Galatians,  First  and  Second 
Corinthians,  and  Romans. 

2.  The  Epistles  of  the  Captivity,  consisting  of 
Colossians,  Philemon,  Ephesians,  and  Philippians. 

3.  The  Pastoral  Epistles,  namely.  First  and  Sec- 
ond Timothy  and  Titus. 

The  following  table  gives  the  times  and  places  of 
composition  of  the  various  Epistles  :  — 

First  Thessalonians Corinth 52 

Second  Thessalonians Corinth 53 

Galatians Ephesus 57 

First  Corinthians Ephesus 57 

^Gloag's  Introd.,  p.  18. 

*For  the  history  of  Paul's  life  consult  the  great  work  of  Conybeare 
and  Howson.  Gloag's  Introd.  and  Stalker's  Life  of  Paul  are  worthy 
of  the  closest  study  in  their  descriptions  of  the  character  of  Paul. 


96  THE  PAULINE  EPISTLES, 

Second  Corinthians Macedonia 57 

Romans Corinth 58 

"^  Colossians Rome 62 

Philemon Rome 62 

Ephesians Rome . , 62 

Philippians Rome 63 

First  Timothy Macedonia 67 

Titus Ephesus 67 

Second  Timothy Rome 67 

Whether  we  possess  all  the  Epistles  that  Paul 
wrote  is  a  much  disputed  question.  It  is  possible 
that  a  short  Epistle  written  to  the  Corinthians  is 
now  lost.  If  this  is  true,  it  is  because  it  was  merely 
a  specific  direction  in  regard  to  a  particular  offense 
in  the  Corinthian  Church,  and  was  only  necessary 
for  that  one  occasion  (i  Cor.  5:9).  Some  have  at- 
tempted to  prove  that  an  Epistle  to  the  Laodiceans 
(Col.  4 :  16)  has  been  lost,  but  it  is  probable  that  this 
was  none  other  than  the  one  now  known  as  the 
Epistle  to  the  Ephesians. 

The  authenticity  of  these  Epistles  will  be  consid- 
ered in  connection  with  the  study  of  each  one  in  its 
order.  It  may  be  noted  here,  however,  that  Eusebius 
classifies  them  all  under  the  head  of  the  undisputed 
Epistles.  Marcion  (130)  gives  ten  Pauline  Epistles 
in  his  list,  omitting  the  three  Pastoral  Epistles,  which 
he  did  not  accept,  possibly  because  they  did  not  at 
all  harmonize  with  his  heretical  opinions.  The  Mura- 
tori  Canon  (170)  names  the  thirteen,  omitting  He- 
brews. Caius  of  Rome  (210)  mentions  the  thirteen. 
The  Syriac  (160)  and  Old  Latin  (170)  Versions  in- 
clude them  all.  Individual  Epistles  have  been  as- 
sailed by  rationalistic  critics  in  this  century,  but  the 
Church  as  a  whole  has  always   and  everywhere  aq- 


GENERAL  INTRODUCTION.  97 

cepted  the  thirteen  Epistles  and  also  Hebrews  as 
Pauline,  with  a  notable  exception  in  regard  to  this 
latter  Epistle  that  will  be  considered  when  it  is 
studied. 

These  Epistles  can  be  studied  most  intelligently 
by  considering  them  in    their   chronological  order. 
This  is  the  plan  that  will  be  pursued  as  we  turn  now 
to  the  study  of  their  special  introduction. 
7 


CHAPTER  VI. 

The  Pauline  Epistles  —  Special  Intuoduction. 

I.  THE  FIRST  epistle  TO  THE  THESSALONIANS. 

/.   Canonicity. 

It  was  not  until  the  present  century  that  the 
first  assault  was  made  upon  this  Epistle,  for  up  to 
that  time  no  one  had  ever  even  thought  of  question- 
ing-its  right  to  a  place  in  the  New  Testament  Canon. 
It  is  true  that  we  do  not  find  it  extensively  quoted 
in  the  early  Christian  writings,  but  still  we  can  find 
sufficient  external  testimony  in  its  favor  to  establish 
its  canonicity.  The  allusions  to  it  in  the  Apostolic 
Fathers  are  not  absolutely  certain,  but  there  are,  to 
say  the  least,  some  marked  coincidences  between 
passages  in  it  and  in  Ignatius  (115),  and  in  Polycarp 
(116).  Marcion  (130)  included  it  in  his  catalogue, 
and  it  is  named  in  the  Muratori  Canon  (170).  It  is 
found  also  in  the  Syriac  (160)  and  Old  Latin  (i/o) 
Versions.  In  the  writings  of  Irenaeus  (175),  Tertul- 
lian  (190),  and  Clement  of  Alexandria  (195),  we  have 
positive  and  unqualified  testimony  to  the  Pauline 
authorship  of  this  Epistle.  These  witnesses  come 
from  all  parts  of  the  Church. 
[98J 


FIRST  THESSALONIANS.  99 

Turning  to  the  Epistle  itself,  the  internal  evi- 
dence is  found  to  be  even  more  positive.  It  claims 
to  be  by  Paul  ( I :i;  2:18).  All  of  its  historical  allu- 
sions fit  into  and  agree  with  the  events  of  the  life  of 
Paul  so  far  as  recorded  in  the  Acts  (2  :  2,  cf  Acts 
16 :  22  ;  3:4,  cf.  Acts  17:5;  2  :  17,  cf.  Acts  18  :  5). 
The  character  of  the  Apostle,  as  well  as  his  style  in 
composition,  are  indelibly  stamped  upon  it.  **  The 
character  of  Paul  is  impressed  on  this  Epistle  :  his 
anxiety  about  his  converts  (3  :  i,  2) ;  his  earnest 
desire  for  their  spiritual  good  (3:8-11);  his  almost 
womanly  tenderness  (2:7);  his  joy  when  he  hears 
from  Timothy  of  the  steadfastness  of  their  faith 
(3  •  6>  7)  ;  and  his  sympathy  with  them  in  their  dis- 
tresses (4:  13,  18)."^ 

By  some  late  writers  it  has  been  objected  that 
this  Epistle  is  too  devoid  of  doctrinal  statements  to 
have  proceeded  from  the  pen  of  the  Apostle.  But 
when  the  circumstances  that  led  to  the  composition 
of  the  letter  are  considered,  the  absence  of  doctrinal 
statements  is  easily  accounted  for.  There  were  no 
heresies  to  combat,  and  consequently  there  was  no 
special  call  for  statements  of  doctrine.  And  more- 
over the  whole  Epistle  in  other  respects  is  in 
keeping  with  Pauline  authorship.  And  when  the 
historical  allusions,  as  well  as  the  general  charac- 
teristics, of  the  Epistle  are  found  to  be  in  harmony, 
not  only  with  its  own  asserted  Pauline  authorship, 
but  also  with  the  external  evidence  to  that  fact,  we 
may  well  accept  it  as  a  genuine  Pauline  Epistle, 
having  an  indisputable  right  to  a  place  in  the  New 
Testament  Canon. 

iQoag's  Introduction   to  the  Pauline  Epistles,  p.  8l. 


100  THE  PAULINE  EPISTLES, 

II.  The  Church  at  Thessalonica. 

Thessalonica  was  an  important  city  in  Paul's  day, 
being  situated  on  the  great  Egnatian  highway  and 
at  the  head  of  the  Thermaic  Bay.  Having  a  splen- 
did natural  harbor,  and  being  so  favorably  situated, 
it  became  the  second  city  in  size  and  importance  in 
Macedonia.  It  was  named  after  the  sister  of  Alex- 
ander the  Great.  Its  business  advantages  made  it 
a  thriving  city,  with  a  large  and  mixed  population,  of 
which  the  Jews  constituted  a  large  part.  It  remains 
to  this  day  under  the  name  of  Saloniki,  and  is  still  a 
city  of  considerable  importance. 

When  Paul  arrived  there  on  his  second  missionary 
journey,  he  devoted  his  attention  for  three  successive 
weeks  to  his  countrymen,  of  whom  a  large  number 
resided  in  this  city.  The  success  that  attended  his 
preaching  aroused  the  hostility  of  these  Jews. 
Driven  by  their  opposition  from  the  synagogue,  the 
Apostle  labored  for  some  time  with  signal  success 
among  the  Gentiles.  This  enraged  the  Jews  beyond 
measure,  and  their  hatred  soon  found  expression  in 
a  furious  riot  that  they  with  certain  idle  vagabonds 
of  the  city  created.  In  their  rage  they  sought  the 
missionaries,  but,  failing  to  find  them,  they  seized 
upon  one  Jason  and  certain  other  converts.  Taking 
these  persons  before  the  magistrates,  they  accused 
them  of  treason  against  the  Emperor.  They  char- 
acterized the  missionaries  as  "  these  that  have  turned 
the  world  upside  down."  The  Kingship  of  Jesus 
was  apparently  the  basis  and  the  burden  of  Paul's 
preaching  at  Thessalonica,  and  from  this  the  rabble 
easily  formulated  the  charge  of  treason  against  the 


FIRST  THESSALONIANS.  101 

law  and  the  Emperor.  The  outcome  of  these  pro- 
ceedings was  that  Jason  and  his  companions  were 
bound  over  to  keep  the  peace  (Acts  17  :  1-9). 

It  was  evident  to  the  converts  of  Paul  that  he 
could  not  remain  safely  in  the  city  in  the  face  of  such 
opposition.  Nor  could  any  work  be  accomplished  as 
long  as  such  excitement  continued,  so  the  brethren 
sent  Paul  and  Silas  away.  Proceeding  on  his  journey, 
Paul  came  to  Berea,  where  Timothy  soon  joined  him 
and  Silas.  The  work  in  Berea  was  even  more  prom- 
ising than  it  had  been  at  Thessalonica,  but  it  was 
soon  stopped  by  the  active  enemies  of  Paul,  who  fol- 
lowed him  from  that  city  as  soon  as  they  had  heard 
of  his  presence  and  success  in  Berea.  Leaving  Silas 
and  Timothy  to  continue  the  work,  the  Apostle  went 
on  in  company  with  certain  Bereans  to  Athens, 
where  Timothy  at  Paul's  earnest  request  presently 
followed  him.  Hearing  from  Timothy  of  continued 
persecutions  of  the  Christians  at  Thessalonica,  he 
sent  that  faithful  young  disciple  back  to  comfort  and 
strengthen  them  (i  Thess.  3  :  1-3).  Passing  on  from 
Athens,  Paul  soon  reached  Corinth,  where  he  ere 
long  was  rejoined  by  Silas  and  Timothy,  who  brought 
him  a  full  account  of  the  condition  of  affairs  at 
Thessalonica. 

The  principal  element  in  the  Thessalonian  church 
was  Gentile.  They  are  described  as  having  "  turned 
to  God  from  idols  to  serve  the  living  and  true  God  " 
(i  Thess.  I  :9).  There  are  no  quotations  from,  and 
scarcely  any  allusions  to,  the  Old  Testament  in  the 
two  letters  written  to  them.  The  history  of  the  Acts 
records  that  "  some  of  them  \i.  e.  Jews]  believed  and 
consorted  with  Paul  and   Silas ;   and  of  the  devout 


102  THE  PAULINE  EPISTLES. 

Greeks  a  great  multitude,  and  of  the  chief  women 
not  a  few"  (Acts  17:4).  Thus  with  a  slight  Jewish 
sprinkling,  the  Gentile  element  largely  predominated 
in  the  Thessalonian  church.  How  long  the  Apostle 
remained  in  the  city  after  his  expulsion  from  the 
synagogue  at  the  end  of  three  weeks,  we  do  not 
know,  but  he  must  have  been  there  several  weeks 
longer  in  order  to  have  accomplished  what  he  did. 
In  that  time  his  work  grew  with  great  rapidity  and 
marked  success,  so  that  ere  he  was  compelled  to 
leave  the  city  the  number  of  believers  was  large. 

///.    The  Occasion  and  Object  of  the  Epistle, 

The  immediate  occasion  of  the  writing  of  this 
Epistle  was  the  coming  of  Timothy  and  Silas  to 
Paul  at  Corinth,  bringing  him  a  full  account  of  affairs 
at  Thessalonica.  Since  the  moment  when  he  had  sent 
Timothy  to  them  from  Athens,  Paul  had  been  anx- 
ious to  hear  how  the  Thessalonian  Christians  were 
progressing.  Twice  he  had  attempted  to  revisit 
them,  but  had  been  hindered  (2 :  18),  and  conse- 
quently he  had  had  to  wait  for  his  companions  to 
come  to  him.  The  report  that  was  brought  to  him 
was  in  the  main  satisfactory.  "Believers,  in  spite  of 
persecutions,  continued  steadfast  in  their  faith  and 
in  their  attachment  to  Paul,  their  spiritual  father 
(3  '^j  7)j  so  that  they  became  examples  to  all  that 
believe  in  Thessalonica  and  Achaia  (i  :/)  :  their  faith 
was  everywhere  spread  abroad,  and  their  love  to  one 
another  abounded."  Mixed  with  this  good  report, 
however,  was  information  that  was  not  so  satisfac- 
tory. They  were  far  from  perfect.  Heathen  vices 
still  clung  to  some  of  their  number.     False  views  of 


FIRST  TI/ESSALONIAArS.  103 

the  Second  Advent  of  Christ  had  disturbed  others, 
who  had  ceased  from  their  usual  occupations,  and 
had  become  actual  nuisances  to  the  church,  in  their 
idle  expectancy  of  the  immediate  coming  of  the 
Saviour.  Some  also  had  died,  and  their  friends 
were  greatly  distressed,  because  they  thought  that 
the  dead  could  not  participate  in  the  blessings  of 
that  glorious  event. 

Without  losing  any  time  the  Apostle  wrote  this 
Epistle,  and  his  object,  writes  Dr.  Gloag,  was  "  to 
confirm  the  Thessalonians  in  the  Christian  faith,  to 
exhort  them  to  relinquish  those  vices  in  which  they 
still  indulged,  to  comfort  them  in  the  sufferings  to 
which  thej/;^.w£re_ex£osed,  to  consoie  thera. under 
the  loss  of  their  friends,  and  to  exhort  them  to  make 
further  progress  in  every  department  of  Christian 
character."^ 

IV.    The  Outline  of  the  Epistle. 

This  Epistle  is  naturally  divided  into  two  parts, 
the  historical  and  the  practical. 

I.  The  Historical  Portion,     i  :  1-3  :  13. 

1.  Salutation,     i  :  i. 

2.  Gratefully    records     their     conversion     and 

progress,     i  :  2-10. 

3.  Asserts  the  purity  and  blamelessness  of  his 

life  among  them.     2  :  1-12. 

4.  Renews  his  thanksgiving   for   their   conver- 

sion, referring  to  the  persecutions  they  had 
suffered.     2  :  13-16. 

5.  Recounts  his  anxiety  for  them,  his  sending 

Timothy,  his  joy  at  the  word  brought  to 
him.     2  :  17-3  :  10. 

^  Gloag's  Introd.  to  the  Pauline  Epistles,  p.  90. 


104  THE  PAULINE  EPISTLES, 

6.  Prays  for  them.     3  :  11-13. 
11.  The  Practical  Portion.     4:1-5:  28. 

1.  Warning  against  impurity.     4:1-8. 

2.  Exhortation   to  Christian  love,  and   to  ear- 

nestness of  life.     4  :  9-12. 

3.  Refers  to  the  matter  of  the  Second  Advent. 

4:13-5:11. 
{a)  The  part  the  dead  are  to  play  in  it.     4 : 

13-18. 
{b)  The  time  uncertain.     5  :  1-3. 
{c)  The  need  for  watchfulness.     5  :  4-1 1. 

4.  Exhortation  to  orderly  living  and  to  obedi- 

ence.    5 : 12-15. 

5.  Sundry  injunctions.     5  :  16-22. 

6.  Again  prays  for  them.     5  :  23,  24. 

7.  Closing    injunctions    and    benediction.       5  • 

25-28. 

V,  When  and  Where  Written. 

The  date  of  this  Epistle  can  quite  readily  be  fixed. 
>The  postscript  in  our  English  Bible  informs  us  that  it 
'  was  written  at  Athens,  but  this  is  manifestly  an  error. 
It  is  to  be  remembered  that  the  postscripts  at  the 
ends  of  the  Epistles  are  of  no  more  authority  than 
the  headings  of  the  chapters,  since  they  do  not  form 
part  of  the  original  text.  Silas  and  Timothy  are  as- 
sociated with  the  Apostle  in  the  salutation,  and  it 
was  written  immediately  after  Timothy  had  brought 
his  report  to  Paul.  It  was  while  he  was  at  Corinth 
that  these  two  workers  joined  the  Apostle  (Acts  18  : 
5).  The  letter  must  then  have  been  written  at  Cor- 
inth during  Paul's  eighteen  months*  residence  there, 


FIRST  THESSALONIANS.  105 

which  period  ended  with  the  Spring  of  the  year  54, 
for  we  never  find  Silas  (Silvanus)  associated  with 
Paul  after  this  period.  Enough  time  must  have 
elapsed  between  the  departure  of  Paul  from  Thessa- 
lonica  and  the  writing  of  this  Epistle,  for  the  spread 
of  their  faith,  for  the  Apostle  to  have  made  two  at- 
tempts to  revisit  them,  and  for  some  of  their  num- 
ber to  have  died.  A  few  months  will  suffice  for  these 
events.  The  Second  Epistle  was  also  written  during 
this  same  period,  and  we  must  allow  sufficient  time 
to  elapse  between  the  composition  of  these  two 
Epistles  for  the  development  shown  in  the  Second 
Epistle.  This  necessitates  dating  this  First  Epistle 
early  in  that  period,  that  is,  late  in  52  A.  D.,  or 
possibly  early  in  53  A.  D. 

VI.  Peculiarities  of  the  Epistle, 

No  little  interest  is  attached  to  this  Epistle  be- 
cause of  the  fact  that  it  is  the  first  that  proceeded 
from  the  pen  of  the  great  Apostle.  Clear-cut  state- 
ments of  doctrines  were  not  usually  given  until 
heresy  had  arisen,  and  there  was  need  for  defining 
the  truth.  It  is  doubtless  true  that  the  germs  of 
heresy  were  already  in  existence  when  this  Epistle 
was  written,  but  they  had  not  assumed  such  a  shape 
that  they  needed  to  be  controverted.  For  this  rea- 
son these  Epistles  to  the  Thessalonians  deal  with 
practice  rather  than  with  doctrine.  There  was  no 
special  occasion  for  the  statement  of  any  of  those  doc- 
trines that  were  peculiarly  Pauline  a  few  years  later. 
But  it  cannot  be  said  that  this  Epistle  is  colorless, 
for  the  divinity  of  Christ  is  most  clearly  recognized. 


106  THE  PAULINE  EPISTLES. 

As  the  Epistle,  however,  was  intended  to  correct 
errors  of  conduct  rather  than  to  combat  errors  of 
belief,  it  would  be  unreasonable  to  look  for  any- 
formal  dogmatic  statements  in  it.  The  end  to 
which  it  was  directed  was  the  securing  of  purity 
of  life  and  of  industry,  rather  than  instruction  in 
doctrine. 

The  frequent  use  of  the  name  *'Lord"  as  applied 
to  Jesus  is  especially  noticeable.  No  less  than 
twenty-five  times  is  the  Saviour  called  by  this  title. 
"  It  is  impossible  for  any  subsequent  declaration  of 
the  divinity  of  Christ  to  rise  beyond  that  afforded 
by  St.  Paul's  frequent  application  of  the  attribute  of 
'Lord'  to  Jesus  in  the  First  Epistle  to  the  Thessa- 
lonians.  The  Apostle  has  already  exhausted  human 
language  and  human  thought.  The  plummet  of 
dogma  can  drop  no  deeper ;  the  wing  of  adoration 
can  soar  no  higher."^  And  since  this  is  true  in  an 
especial  sense  of  this  Epistle,  it  is  not  surprising 
that  Paul  in  it  explicitly  and  directly  worships  Jesus 
by  prayer,  saying,  "  Now  may  our  God  and  Father 
Himself,  and  our  Lord  Jesus,  direct  our  way  unto 
you  :  and  the  Lord  make  you  to  increase  and  abound 
in  love  "(3:  II,  R.  v.). 

Finally,  it  is  worthy  of  note  that  the  Thessalon- 
ians  were  organized  into  a  church  (i  :  i)  ;  they  had 
a  regular  ministry  (5  :  12-13)  ;  and  at  a  regular  meet- 
ing of  their  church  this  Epistle  was  to  be  read 
(5  :  27).  The  Thessalonians  were  consequently  fully 
equipped  for  worship  and  service.  The  importance 
of  this  Epistle  from  an  ecclesiastical  standpoint  is 
very  great,  for  it  presents  to  us  at  this  early  date  a 

3  Lord  Bishop  of  Derry  in  the  Bible  Commentary,  Introd.  to  Thess. 


SECOND  THESSALONIANS.  107 

church    with  regularly  appointed   officers,  who  had 
a  recognized  authority  over  their  brethren. 

II.   THE   SECOND    EPISTLE   TO    THE    THESSALONIANS. 

/.   Canonicity, 

The  external  testimony  in  support  of  this  Epistle 
is  more  positive  than  that  in  favor  of  the  First 
Epistle.  There  can  be  but  little  question  about 
Polycarp's  (ii6)  use  of  it.  Justin  Martyr  (145)  gives 
very  clear  evidence  of  his  having  it  in  his  possession. 
Marcion  (130)  accorded  it  a  place  in  his  catalogue, 
and  it  is  also  found  in  the  Muratori  Canon  (i/o).  It 
is  also  contained  in  the  Syriac  (160),  and  Old  Latin 
(170)  Versions.  Passing  on  to  the  last  quarter  of  the 
second  century,  we  find  it  definitely  quoted  as  Paul- 
ine by  Irenaeus  (175),  Tertullian  (190),  and  Clement 
of  Alexandria  (195).  There  is  thus  an  unbroken 
line  of  witnesses  in  favor  of  it,  while  there  is  not  a 
single  voice  or  name  from  any  part  of  the  early 
Church  to  be  cited  in  opposition  to  it. 

The  internal  testimony  is  likewise  positively  in 
support  of  Pauline  authorship.  The  style,  as  well 
as  the  contents,  of  the  letter  proclaims  this  fact  so 
plainly  that  those  who  for  subjective  reasons  deny 
its  genuineness,  are  sorely  put  to  in  their  efforts  to 
explain  away  the  unmistakable  marks  of  the  Apostle's 
hand.  The  character  of  Paul  is  indelibly  stamped 
upon  it  in  "  his  lively  sympathy  with  his  converts, 
his  tenderness  when  censuring  them,  his  commenda- 
tion of  them,  his  characteristic  mention  of  himself 
and  his  desire  for  an  interest  in  their  prayers."  The 
individuality  of  Paul  is  apparent  throughout  the 
whole  Epistle.     We  have  **  in  short,  as  many  inter- 


108  THE  PAULINE  EPISTLES. 

nal  proofs  of  Pauline  origin  as  could  be  expected  to 
be  found  in  so  short  an  Epistle."  And  to  these  facts 
must  be  added  the  specific  claim  to  Pauline  author- 
ship in  the  opening  salutation,  as  well  as  at  the  close 
of  the  letter,  where  we  read,  ''The  salutation  of  Paul 
with  mine  own  hand,  which  is  the  token  in  every 
epistle:    so  I  write"  (3:  17). 

It  was  not  until  the  year  1804  A.  D.  that  any  one 
undertook  to  assail  this  Epistle.  It  may  be  asked, 
then,  how  it  happens  that  any  have  denied  its  Paul- 
ine authorship  in  the  face  of  the  existing  evidence. 
The  offense  is  found  in  the  famous  passage  relating 
to  the  "man  of  sin"  (2:3-12).  The  prophetical 
character  of  this  section  is  undeniable,  if  attributed 
to  Paul.  The  philosophical  theories  of  the  assail- 
ants of  this  Epistle  do  not  admit  of  any  such  thing 
as  predictive  prophecy.  "  Get  rid  of  the  supernat- 
ural at  all  hazards,"  is  the  watchword  of  these  critics. 
Positive  historical  testimony  must  be  explained  away, 
if  it  comes  into  conflict  with  their  philosophy.  And 
in  order  to  do  this  these  critics  have  certainly  in- 
dulged a  great  deal  of  what  Professor  Salmon  has 
well  called  "childish  criticism."  The  attempt  has 
been  made  to  prove  that  the  Epistle  is  a  forgery  by 
a  later  hand.  But  we  may  heartily  agree  with  Bleek, 
who,  referring  to  this  passage,  says,  "  Indeed  the 
whole  tone  of  the  passage  is  so  individual,  intuitive, 
and  characteristic  that  it  is  difficult  to  conceive  of  it 
as  a  forgery  of  some  late  author."^  And  in  the  same 
line  Weiss  may  be  quoted,  who  affirms  that  "  the 
eschatological  view  of  our  Epistle  is  not  only  not  an 
argument   against  its  genuineness,  but  on  the  con- 

^Bleek's  Introd.  to  the  N.  T.,  Vol.  I.,  p.  417. 


SECOND    THESSALONIANS.  109 

trary   is   the  only  ground  on  which   it   can   be  ex- 
plained."* 

We  may  then  feel  well  satisfied  that  this  Epistle 
is  a  genuine  Pauline  Epistle,  and  that  in  conse- 
quence of  this  it  has  a  right  to  a  place  among  the 
canonical  books  of  the  New  Testament. 

//.   The  Occasion  and  Object  of  the  Epistle. 

It  is  impossible  to  tell  who  carried  the  First  Epis- 
tle to  its  destination.  Doubtless  in  a  few  short 
months  another  report  came  to  the  Apostle  concern- 
ing the  status  of  affairs  at  Thessalonica  since  the 
reception  of  the  First  Epistle.  This  report  had 
many  encouraging  features.  Progress  had  been 
made  in  faith  and  in  love  by  the  Thessalonian 
Christians,  and  there  was  much  to  cause  thanks- 
giving on  the  part  of  the  Apostle.  Those  who  for- 
merly were  greatly  distressed  by  the  death  of  their 
friends,  had  been  comforted  by  the  words  of  the 
first  letter.  But  in  spite  of  all  this  the  idea  of  an 
immediate  coming  of  the  Lord  had  taken  a  firmer 
hold  on  the  minds  of  some  of  them.  Persecutions 
were  still  raging  around  the  young  Christian  church, 
and  in  some  cases  there  was  a  decided  increase  of 
fanaticism.  The  results  of  the  expectancy  of  a 
speedy  advent  had  been  very  demoralizing,  for  some 
had  entirely  ceased  from  their  accustomed  occupa- 
tions. As  busybodies  they  were  interfering  with 
those  who  desired  to  work. 

Such  disorders  as  had  arisen  could  not  be  tolerated 
at  all,  and  in  his  faithfulness  the  Apostle  sternly  re- 
bukes it.     Feeling  called  on  to  exercise  his  apostolic 

*  Weiss'  Manual  of  Introd.  to  the  N.  T.,  Vol.  I.,  p.  234. 


110  THE  PAULINE  EPISTLES. 

authority,  he  commands  the  disorderly  ones  **that 
with  quietness  they  work  and  eat  their  own  bread  " 
(3  :  12).  In  connection  with  this  matter  the  Apostle 
beseeches  them  not  *'  to  be  troubled,  neither  by 
spirit,  nor  by  word,  nor  by  letter  as  from  us,  as  that 
the  day  of  Christ  is  at  hand"  (2  :  2).  Evidently  the 
Thessalonians  had  either  misinterpreted  what  Paul 
had  written  in  the  First  Epistle,  or  else  a  forged  let- 
ter under  Paul's  name  had  been  received  by  them.  If 
the  latter,  as  seems  much  more  probable,  it  doubtless 
taught  the  immediate  coming  of  Christ,  and  thus 
augmented  the  disturbance  in  that  line.  The  em- 
phatic way  in  which  Paul  subscribes  this  letter  (3  :  17) 
confirms  the  idea  that  it  was  a  spurious  letter  by 
whose  words  they  had  been  troubled. 

The  occasion  of  this  Epistle  was  the  reception  of 
additional  news  from  Thessalonica.  The  main  de- 
sign was  to  rectify  the  serious  error  into  which  they 
had  fallen  regarding  the  Second  Advent,  and  also  in 
this  connection  to  warn  them  against  that  idle  and 
disorderly  condition  into  which  some  of  their  num- 
ber had  fallen.  In  addition  to  this  he  uses  the  op- 
portunity to  praise  and  commend  the  obedient  for 
the  progress  they  had  made,  and  he  exhorts  them  to 
continue  in  that  way.  The  letter  thus  instructs,  con- 
soles, encourages,  and  admonishes  its  readers. 

///.   The  Outline  of  the  Epistle. 

I.  Salutation.     I  :  i,  2. 

II.  Introduction,     i  :  3-12. 

I.   He  thanks  God  for  their  progress  in  faith  and 
in  charity.     1:3. 


SECOND   THESSALONIANS.  \\\ 

2.  Commends  their  patience  in  suffering.     1 14. 

3.  Reminds  them  of  the  righteous    judgments 

of  God  yet  to  come,     i  :  5-10. 
^4.   Prays  for  them,     i  :  11,  12. 
(^Ilf)  Dogmatic  Portion,  in  which  he  speaks  of  the 
"Man  of  Sin,"   correcting  the  erroneous  ideas  that 
had  arisen  among  them  in  regard  to  the  Second  Ad- 
vent.    2:1-12. 

IV.  Hortatory  Portion.     2  :  13-3  :  15. 

1.  Renews   his   thanksgiving   on    their    behalf. 

2:  13,  14. 

2.  Exhorts  them  to  stand  fast.     2:15. 

3.  Prays  for  them.     2  :  16,  17. 

4.  Asks  for  their  prayers   in  his   own    behalf. 

3:1-3. 

5.  Affirms  his  confidence  in  them.     3  :4,  5. 

6.  Reproves    the    disorderly,    citing    his     own 

example  among  them,  and  charges  the 
faithful  to  separate  themselves  from  all 
such.  3 : 6-15. 

V.  Conclusion.      3  :  16-18. 

1.  Prays  again  for  them.     3  :  16. 

2.  Closing  salutation  and  benediction.    3  :  17,  18. 

IV.  Date  ajid  Place  of  Composition. 

The  First  Epistle  was  written  at  Corinth  at  the 
close  of  52  A.  D.,  or  possibly  early  in  53  A.  D.  This 
Second  Epistle  was  written  at  the  same  place  a  few 
months  later.  The  name  of  Silas  (Silvanus)  is  never 
again  associated  with  Paul  after  this  residence  in  Cor- 
inth, and  for  this  reason  this  letter  must  have  been 
written  during  this  same  period.  All  the  time  that 
we  need  to  allow  between  the  two  Epistles  is  what 


112  THE  PAULINE  EPISTLES. 

would  be  sufficient  for  the  reception  of  the  First  at 
Thessalonica,  for  it  to  become  well  known  to  the 
Christians  there,  and  for  their  messenger  to  return 
to  the  Apostle  with  a  full  account  of  its  reception 
and  effect.  This  would  require  several  months. 
It  is  to  be  noted  that  the  circumstances  of  the 
Thessalonians  do  not  seem  to  have  changed  much 
since  the  time  of  the  former  communication.  The 
request  of  the  Apostle  for  their  prayers  for  his  de- 
liverance from  wicked  and  unreasonable  men  (3  : 2), 
may  refer  to  the  outbreak  in  Corinth  after  the  ac- 
cession of  Gallio  to  the  deputy-ship  of  Achaia  (Acts 
18  :  12-17).  The  most  probable  date  seems  to  be  the 
latter  part  of  the  Summer  of  53  A.  D. 

F.  Peculiarities  of  this  Epistle, 

The  most  marked  peculiarity  of  this  Epistle  is  its 
apocalyptic  section  on  the  ''  Man  of  Sin"  (2  :  1-12). 
It  seems  scarcely  necessary  to  affirm  that  there  is  no 
real  antagonism  between  the  two  Epistles  in  regard 
to  the  matter  of  the  Second  Advent  of  the  Saviour. 
"The  one  Epistle,"  writes  Professor  Salmon,  "pre- 
sents our  Lord's  second  coming  as  possibly  soon,  the 
other  as  not  immediate  —  as  needing  that  certain 
prophetic  preliminary  signs  should  first  be  fulfilled."^ 
This  section  is  clearly  prophetic  in  its  character.  And 
this  "  prophecy  is  not  independent  of  previous  ones, 
—  its  roots  are  in  Daniel,  and  from  the  beginning  to 
the  end  it  is  full  of  allusions  to  our  Lord's  great 
apocalyptic  discourse."^ 

5  Salmon's  Introd.  to  the  N.  T.,  p.  460. 

®See  Professor  Warfield's  articles  on  the  Prophecies  of  St.  Paul  in 
the  Expositor.     3rd  Series,  Vol.  IV.,  p.  30. 


GALATIANS.  113 

III.    THE  EPISTLE  TO  THE   GALATIANS. 
/.   Canonicity. 

The  list  of  external  testimonies  to  this  Epistle 
certainly  includes  Polycarp  (ii6),  if  not  also  Clement 
of  Rome  (96),  and  Ignatius  (115).  The  writer  of  the 
epistle  to  Diognetus  (i  17)  shows  his  dependence  on 
it.  Marcion  (130)  included  it  in  his  catalogue,  omit- 
ting, however,  two  passages  in  it  that  contradicted 
his  peculiar  teachings.  Justin  Martyr  (145)  quotes  it, 
and  so  does  Tatian  the  Syrian  (150-170).  It  is  found 
in  the  Muratori  Canon  (170),  as  well  as  in  the  Syriac 
(160)  and  Old  Latin  (170)  Versions.  Certain  early 
heretics,  including  the  Ophites  and  others,  used  it. 
Irenaeus  (175),  Tertullian  (190),  and  Clement  of  Alex- 
andria (195)  repeatedly  quote  it  by  name  and  ascribe 
it  to  Paul. 

The  internal  evidence  is  likewise  strong.  The 
letter  claims  to  be  by  Paul,  reciting  some  of  the 
events  of  his  life  not  given  elsewhere.  The  histor- 
ical references  are  capable  of  being  perfectly  harmon- 
ized with  the  Acts.  It  is  also  unquestionably  Pauline 
in  its  matter,  as  well  as  in  its  manner.  "  The  vehe- 
mence of  temper,  the  desire  to  be  present  among 
them,  the  mixture  of  severity  and  tenderness  in  the 
censures,  and  the  uncompromising  maintenance  of 
the  great  principle  of  Christian  liberty,  which  per- 
vade the  Epistle,  all  remind  of  Paul,  and  are  all  be- 
yond the  art  of  a  forger  of  the  second  century."'^ 
Indeed  "  its  every  sentence  so  completely  reflects 
the  life  and  character  of  the  Apostle  to  the  Gentiles 

'  Gloag's  Introd.  to  the  Pauline  Epistles,  p.  137. 

s 


114  THE  PAULINE  EPISTLES. 

that  its  genuineness  has  not  been  seriously  ques- 
tioned," except  by  a  very  few,  and  they  are  of  the 
ultra  rationalistic  school  of  Dutch  critics  who  question 
everything.  It  may  then  be  said  that  '*  he  who  de- 
nies its  genuineness  pronounces  on  himself  the  sen- 
tence of  incapacity  to  distinguish  false  from  true."* 
So  strong  is  this  evidence  from  both  sources,  in- 
ternal and  external,  that  even  many  critics  who  re- 
ject other  Epistles,  acknowledge  this  one  to  be  a 
genuine  Pauline  Epistle.  Such  a  concession  is  an 
acknowledgement  of  the  force  of  the  evidence. 
There  is  not  the  slightest  reason  for  a  doubt  as  to 
the  authenticity  and  genuineness  of  this  Epistle. 

//.   The  Galatian  Churches. 

The  Galatians  were  descendants  of  the  Gauls  who 
invaded  Greece  and  Asia  Minor  about  three  centuries 
before  the  Christian  Era.  For  a  time  these  fierce 
Northerners  swept  everything  before  them,  but  at 
length  they  were  defeated  in  238  B.  c,  by  Antiochus 
Soter,  King  of  Syria,  and  Attains,  King  of  Pergamos. 
After  that  disastrous  defeat  they  were  confined  to  a 
part  of  Phrygia,  and  they  gave  the  name  of  Galatia 
to  it.  The  Galatia  of  Paul  and  Luke  was  not  the 
Roman  province  of  that  name,  but  was  the  earlier 
kingdom  of  Galatia  which  was  only  a  part  of  it. 
A  close  examination  of  all  the  references  to  Ga- 
latia makes  it  evident  that  the  New  Testament  writ- 
ers had  in  mind  a  narrower  district  than  that  of  the 
Roman  province.     Passing  through  various  fortunes, 

8  Quoted  by  Dean  Howson  in  Bible  Commentary. 


GALATIANS,  115 

Galatia  finally  became  absorbed  in  that  province. 
**The  country  of  Galatia  afforded  great  facilities  for 
commercial  enterprise.  With  fertile  plains  rich  in 
agricultural  produce,  with  extensive  pastures  for 
flocks,  with  a  temperate  climate  and  copious  rivers, 
it  abounded  in  all  those  resources  out  of  which  a 
commerce  is  created."^  The  principal  cities  were 
Ancyra,  Tavium,  and  Pessinus.  The  special  privi- 
leges granted  to  the  Jews  of  Galatia  attracted  many 
of  that  nationality  to  the  province,  and  their  in- 
fluence became  powerful  among  the  Galatians.  In 
addition  to  these  Gaulish  descendants  and  the  Jews, 
there  were  the  remnants  of  the  aboriginal  tribes. 
But  despite  this  mixture  of  inhabitants,  the  Gala- 
tians largely  retained  their  Celtic  language  and 
characteristics. 

The  Galatians  had  some  marked  characteristics. 
**  Fickleness  was  a  striking  feature  in  the  character 
of  the  Galatian  converts.  No  country  embraced  the 
Gospel  so  readily  and  cordially.  They  received  Paul 
with  such  gratitude  and  respect,  as  if  he  were  an 
angel  of  God,  yea,  as  if  he  were  Jesus  Christ  Him- 
self; and  they  were  willing,  if  it  would  have  bene- 
fited the  Apostle,  to  have  plucked  out  their  own 
eyes,  and  to  have  given  them  to  him  (Gal.  4 :  14,  15). 
But  no  church  fell  so  quickly  from  the  faith.  Soon 
converted,  they  soon  relapsed  into  Judaism.  Impul- 
sive and  easily  acted  upon  by  the  Apostle,  they  were 
easily  acted  upon  by  false  teachers."  ^^  The  Galatians 
were  also  superstitious  and  cruel.     "  The  worship  of 

^Lightfoot  on  Gal.,  p.  18. 
i^Gloag's  Introd.  to  the  Pauline  epistles,  p.  140, 


116  THE  PAULINE  EPISTLES. 

Cybele,  with  its  wild  ceremonial  and  hideous  mutila- 
tions, would  naturally  be  attractive  to  the  Gaulish 
mind." 

It  was  upon  his  second  missionary  journey  that 
Paul  in  company  with  Silas  and  Timothy  came  into 
Galatia.  A  sudden  attack  of  his  peculiar  malady, 
his  thorn  in  the  flesh,  evidently  compelled  the  Apos- 
tle to  remain  there  longer  than  he  had  at  first  in- 
tended. Utilizing  his  enforced  stay,  he  preached  the 
Gospel  to  the  Galatians,  who  heard  with  readiness 
his  words  and  embraced  the  salvation  offered  through 
Christ.  Instead  of  being  repulsed  by  the  nature  of 
his  disease,  they  had  fairly  rallied  around  Paul.  His 
own  words  are,  "Ye  know  how  through  infirmity  of 
the  flesh  I  preached  the  Gospel  unto  you  at  the  first. 
And  my  temptation  which  was  in  my  flesh  ye  de- 
spised not,  nor  rejected  ;  but  received  me  as  an  angel 
of  God,  even  as  Christ  Jesus.  .  .  .  For  I  bear  you 
record,  that,  if  it  had  been  possible,  ye  would  have 
plucked  out  your  own  eyes,  and  have  given  them  to 
me"  (4:  13-15).  We  have  no  means  of  telling  how 
long  the  missionary  band  remained  in  Galatia,  but  it 
is  evident  that  phenomenal  success  attended  their 
labors.  Some  three  years  later  (54  A.  D.)  Paul  revis- 
ited the  churches  of  Galatia,  of  which  there  were 
several,  probably  one  in  each  of  the  three  principal 
cities  already  named,  if  not  also  in  other  places  in 
the  province.  On  that  second  visit,  which  was  dur- 
ing the  Apostle's  third  missionary  journey,  he  was 
principally  engaged  in  "  strengthening  all  the  disci- 
ples." Passing  from  thence,  Paul  went  on  to  Ephe- 
sus,  reaching  that  city  late  in  54  A.  D.,  and  remaining 
there  until  Pentecost,  57  A.  D. 


GALATIANS,  117 

///.   The  Occasion  ajid  Object  of  the  Epistle. 

Professor  Warfield  calls  this  "  the  fiery  and  tumul- 
tuous letter,"  and  such  it  truly  is,  for  it  is  eminently 
controversial.  It  was  near  the  close  of  his  residence 
at  Ephesus,  and  about  three  years  after  his  last  visit 
in  Galatia,  that  Paul  was  astounded  to  hear  that  the 
churches  of  Galatia  were  actually  in  danger  of  turn- 
ing their  backs  upon  him  and  the  Gospel  he  had 
preached  to  them  with  apparently  so  great  success. 
"The  tone  of  surprise  of  his  letter  sufficiently  proves 
that  he  was  wholly  unprepared  for  the  bad  news 
when  it  did  reach  him,  and  this  apparently  indicates 
that  he  had  not  heard  from  the  Galatian  churches  for 
some  time.""  Judaizing  teachers  had  made  their 
appearance  among  the  Galatians.  They  were  at- 
tempting to  undermine  the  authority  of  the  Apostle, 
and  were  teaching  a  very  different  gospel  from  the 
one  he  had  taught.  Now,  much  as  the  former 
touched  him,  he  resented  far  more  the  perversion 
of  the  truth. 

The  reception  of  this  information  was  the  occasion 
of  this  letter,  and  his  object  in  writing  it  was  to  de- 
fend his  own  apostolic  authority  and  to  confute  the 
erroneous  teachings  of  the  Judaizing  teachers,  as  well 
as  to  exhort  the  Galatian  Christians  to  constancy  in 
the  faith  he  had  preached  to  them.  Dean  Howson 
writes  :   "  In  writing  this  Epistle  he  had  two  purposes 

11  So  argues  Professor  Warfield  in  a  paper  read  before  the  Exegetical 
Society  in  Dec,  1884,  in  which  he  proves  that  so  far  from  the  Apostle's 
having  had  any  intimation  of  defection  at  the  time  of  his  second  visit  to 
Galatia,  he  supposed  that  all  was  satisfactory  until  the  stunning  news  of 
apostasy  came  to  him. 


118  ,  THE  PAULINE  EPISTLES. 

in  view,  each  essentially  bound  up  with  the  other. 
He  found  it  necessary  on  the  one  hand  to  assert  and 
demonstrate  his  apostolic  independence  and  author- 
ity, and  on  the  other  hand  to  re-state  and  to  prove 
by  argument  the  doctrine  of  free  justification  through 
faith.  These  things  are  done  with  great  vehemence 
and  force.  The  news  from  Galatia  had  startled  him 
and  filled  him  with  anxiety.  He  saw  what  great 
principles  were  at  stake,  and  how  the  whole  future  of 
Christianity  was  likely  to  be  compromised.  Hence 
there  is  in  this  Epistle  an  impress  of  severity  and 
indignation,  which  we  find  in  no  other.  "^^ 

IV.  Outline  of  the  Contents  of  the  Epistle, 

The  following  is  the  outline  of  contents  as  given 
by  Professor  Warfield  :  — 

I.  Apostolic  address  and  greeting,     i  :  1-5. 

n.  Statement  of  the  object  of  this  Epistle,  with 
expressions  of  wonder  at  their  speedy  falling  away 
from  the  true  Gospel.     1:6-10. 

ni.  Treatment  of  the  first  disputed  fact,  that  Paul 
did  not  receive  his  Gospel  from  man's  teaching,  i  : 
1 1-2  :  14. 

1.  Formal  affirmation  of  this  fact,     i  :  ii,  12. 

2.  Proof  of  this  fact.     1:13-2:14. 

(i.)  His  former  intense  Judaism.     I  :  13,  14. 
(2.)  Rescued  by  divine  power,  he  did  not  look 

to  man  for  counsel  and  guidance,     i  : 

15-1;. 
(3.)  It  was  true  that  he  visited  Jerusalem,  but 

it  was  three  years  after  his  conversion 

and  for  only  fifteen  days.     I  :  18,  19. 
12  See  Bible  Commentary,  Introd.  to  Gal, 


galatians.  119 

(4.)  Solemn  asseveration  of  the  truth  of  his 

statement,      i  :  20. 
(5.)  So  far  from  remaining  with  the  apostles, 

he  went  far  away,     i  :  21-24. 
(6.)  Had    been    preaching    independently  for 

fourteen  years.     2  :  i-io. 
(7.)  Above  all  that,  he  had  withstood  Peter 
at  Antioch   for   his  temporary  vacilla- 
tion.    2 : 11-14. 
IV    Treatment  of  second  disputed  fact,  that  sal- 
vation is  by  faith  alone  and  not  by  works.     2:15- 
5  :  12. 

1.  Transition  to  new  subject.     2  :  15-21. 

2.  Proof    of    doctrine    that    justification  is    by 

faith.     3  :  1-5  :  12. 
(i.)  Experience  of  the  Galatians.     3:1-5. 
(2.)  Mode  of  Abraham's  justification.     3:6-9. 
(3.)  Scriptural   account  of  the   effect   of  the 

law.      3  :  10-14. 
(4.)  Proof  from  the  nature  of  the   promises. 

3:15-18. 
(5.)  Answer  to  the  objection  that  this  makes 

the  law  of  none  effect.     3  :  19-29. 
(6.)  Answer  to  the  objection  that  the  Church 

was  for  ages  under  the  law.     4  :  1-7. 
(7.)  Appeals  to  them  not  to  Judaize.    4  :  8-20. 
(8.)  Final  argument  derived  from  the  typical 

teaching  of  the  law  itself.     4  :  21-30. 
(9.)  Earnest  appeal  to  them  to  abide  in  this 

freedom  in  Christ.     4  :  31-5  :  12. 
V.  Practical  exhortations  growing  out  of  the  fore- 
going.    5:13-6:10. 


120  THE  PAULINE  EPISTLES. 

1.  Not    to   let   their   freedom  degenerate   into 

license.     5  :  13-15. 

2.  How  to  keep  the  law.     5  :  16-18. 

3.  Real  test  of  walking  by  the  Spirit.     5  :  19-26. 

4.  Examples  of  fulfilling  the  law.     6  :  i-io. 

VI.  Conclusion  in  Paul's  own  handwriting.  6 : 
11-18. 

1.  Calls  attention  to  the  large  letters.     6:11. 

2.  Exposes  the  motives    of   the  Judaizers.     6 : 

12,  13. 

3.  Gives  the  proper  object  of  glorying  and  the 

reason  for  this.     6  :  14,  15. 

4.  Invokes  a  blessing.     6  :  16. 

5.  His  own  authority  no  longer  to  be  disputed. 

6:  17. 

6.  Benediction.     6:18. 

V,   Date  and  Place  of  Composition. 

It  is  extremely  difficult,  if  not  utterly  impos- 
sible, to  fix  absolutely  the  date  of  this  Epistle,  be- 
cause of  its  singular  lack  of  time  marks.  This  has 
given  rise  to  great  diversity  of  opinion  on  this  mat- 
ter among  scholars.  It  is  to  be  noted,  however,  that 
this  difference  of  opinion  is  only  as  to  the  exact 
point  in  time  between  55  A.  D.  and  58  A.  D.,  when  it 
was  written.  It  is  generally  agreed  that  the  meet- 
ing of  Gal.  2  : 2  was  the  Council  of  Jerusalem  of  50 
A.  D.  (Acts  15).  The  manifest  allusions  to  his  sec- 
ond visit  (1:9;  4:13;  5:21)  seem  to  necessitate 
dating  it  after  the  visit  on  the  third  missionary  jour- 
ney in  54  A.  D.  Quite  a  number  of  writers  taking 
the  words  "so  quickly"  (1:6)  have  supposed  that 
they  refer  to  his  second  visit,  and  accordingly  date 


GALATIANS.  121 

the  Epistle  soon  thereafter  and  early  in  the  three 
years'  residence  at  Ephesus,  i.  e.  late  in  54  A.  D.,  or 
early  in  55  A.  D.  Then  the  manifest  relation  of  this 
Epistle  to  that  to  the  Romans,  the  latter  being  a 
more  formal  enunciation  of  the  doctrinal  part  of  the 
former,  necessitates  dating  it  before  February,  58 
A.  D.,  when  Romans  was  composed.  Professor  Jowett 
writes :  *'  The  similarity  and  dissimilarity  between 
the  two  Epistles  (Galatians  and  Romans)  are  of  that 
kind  which  tends  to  show  that  the  Epistle  to  the 
Galatians  could  not  have  been  written  either  after 
or  contemporaneously  with  the  Epistle  to  the  Ro- 
mans, and  that  it  was  not  therefore  a  compendium  of 
it ;  nor  is  it  probable  that  it  was  written  very  long 
before  it."^^  We  thus  obtain  as  our  two  outside 
limits  of  time  54  and  58  A.  D.  But  where  in  this 
period  does  this  Epistle  come  ? 

Within  this  same  period  come  the  two  letters  to 
the  Corinthian  Church.  Bishop  Lightfoot  presents  an 
elaborate  argument  for  putting  Galatians  after  First 
Corinthians,  and  argues  that  it  was  written  after  the 
Apostle  left  Ephesus,  that  is, after  Pentecost,  57  A.  D." 
On  the  other  hand.  Professor  Warfield  ^^  presents  the 
strongest  arguments  for  dating  Galatians  before  First 
Corinthians.  Taking  the  passages  usually  relied  upon 
to  prove  that  Paul  was  cognizant  of  the  growing  de- 
fection among  the  Galatians  on  his  second  visit  to 
them  in  54  A.  D.,  he  argues  that  they  do  not  furnish 
the  supposed  basis  for  such  a  state  of  affairs.  "  There 
is,"  he  writes,  "  a  complete  lack  of  anything  that  will 

i3Jowett's  Epistles  of  St.  Paul,  Vol.  I.,  p.  202. 

"  Lightfoot  on  Galatians,  p.  42. 

^^  Journal  of  Exegetical  Society,  1885. 


122  THE  PAULINE  EPISTLES. 

justify  us  in  asserting  it  to  be  even  probable  that  the 
Judaizing  heresy  had  already  broken  out,  or  even 
that  unhealthy  symptoms  threatening  the  purity  of 
the  Church  had  already  appeared,  or  that  there  was 
an  inclination  to  yield  to  them  apparent."  Turning 
to  First  Corinthians,  Dr.  Warfield  dwells  upon  "  a 
few  obscure  allusions  in  the  letter  (i6 :  i  ;  9:2;  7 : 
17  ;  4  :  17)  which  taken  together  seem  to  raise  a  proba- 
bility in  favor  of  the  priority  of  Galatians  to  that 
Epistle  sufficient  to  determine  our  opinion."  These 
passages  must  be  studied  in  detail  in  order  that  their 
cumulative  force  may  be  felt,  for  it  is  acknowledged 
that  they  do  not  singly  prove  the  point  in  hand. 
Summing  up  the  whole  argument,  the  same  authority 
continues :  "  In  accordance  with  its  resemblances 
with  Romans  and  Second  Corinthians,  we  must  place 
its  origin  somewhat  near  the  dates  of  those  Epistles. 
In  accordance  with  the  *  so  quickly'  of  i  :  6,  the  ref- 
erence of  which  is  no  doubt  to  the  time  of  the  con- 
version of  the  Galatians,  but,  conjoined  with  that, 
also  to  the  time  of  his  last  seeing  them,  we  must 
place  it  not  too  long  after  the  Apostle's  second  visit. 
In  accordance  with  its  hints  as  to  its  place  in  the 
history  of  the  Apostle's  suffering,  external  or  inter- 
nal, we  must  place  it  almost  contemporaneous  with 
First  Corinthians.  And  in  accordance  with  some 
seeming  allusions  to  it  in  First  Corinthians(i6:  i  ; 
9:2;  7:17;  4:17),  we  must  place  it  before  First 
Corinthians.  We  purpose,  therefore,  to  assume  pro- 
visionally that  the  Epistle  was  written  at  Ephesus, 
about,  or  somewhat  earlier  than  the  Passover  of  the 
year  57  A.  D.,  and  only  a  few  weeks  at  most  before 
First  Corinthians.     This  conclusion  is  not  firm ;  it 


GALATIANS.  123 

can  be  readily  overturned  by  any  real  evidence  to 
the  contrary.  But  in  the  lack  of  decisive  evidence 
either  way,  it  appears  to  be  the  most  probable  con- 
clusion attainable." 

VI.  Peculiarities. 

It  is  especially  noticeable  that  there  are  no  com- 
mendatory words  in  this  Epistle.  The  Apostle 
rushes  in  medias  res,  and  this  leaves  no  time  for 
the  words  of  commendation  with  which  he  usually 
prefaces  his  letters.  But  while  there  is  great  sever- 
ity in  this  Epistle,  there  is  still  an  undertone  of  ten- 
derness as  he  strives  to  win  the  Galatians  back  to 
the  simplicity  and  truth  of  the  Gospel.  This  is 
the  most  controversial  of  all  the  Pauline  Epistles. 

This  is  the  Epistle  that  was  the  inspiration  of 
Martin  Luther  in  the  Reformation  of  which  he  was 
the  great  leader.  Its  great  doctrine  of  justification 
by  faith,  so  clearly  set  forth  and  so  explicitly  taught, 
led  that  mighty  man  out  of  the  mazes  of  Romanism 
into  the  clear  light  of  the  Gospel. 

Another  peculiarity  of  the  Epistle  is  brought  out 
in  the  words  of  6:  ii,  "Ye  see  how  large  a  letter  I 
have  written  unto  you  with  mine  own  hand."  The 
translation  of  the  Authorized  Version  here  is  mani- 
festly faulty,  and  that  of  the  marginal  reading  of  the 
Revised  Version  is  a  better  rendering  of  the  origi- 
nal, *'  See  with  how  large  letters  I  write  unto  you 
with  mine  own  hand."  The  word  translated  "  how 
large"  denotes  the  size  of  the  characters,  and  not 
the  length  of  the  whole  Epistle.  The  Apostle  usu- 
ally availed  himself  of  the  services  of  an  amanuensis 
(Rom.  i6  :  22  ;    i  Cor.  i6  :  21  ;   Col.  4:  18  ;  2  Thess. 


124  THE  PAULINE  EPISTLES, 

3  :  17),  and  added  with  his  own  hand  only  the  con- 
cluding words  of  his  Epistles.  So  at  this  point  (6 : 
11)  he  took  the  stylus  from  the  hand  of  the  amanu- 
ensis, and  in  bold  characters  wrote  with  his  own 
hand  the  words  of  6:11-18.  The  word  translated 
"  I  write  "  is  what  is  known  as  an  epistolary  aorist, 
and  is  conveniently  translated  by  a  present  tense, 
marking  the  point  at  which  the  Apostle  takes  the 
pen  in  his  own  hand.  Thus  he  himself  adds  the 
last  words  of  the  Epistle,  writing  them  in  large 
letters  in  order  to  make  them  more  emphatic.  The 
large  characters  also  incidentally  manifest  the  stress 
of  feeling  under  which  Paul  was  laboring  at  the  time 
of  the  composition  of  this  Epistle. 

IV.  THE  FIRST  EPISTLE  TO  THE  CORINTHIANS. 
,  /.  Canonicity. 

The  canonicity  of  this  Epistle  is  so  well  attested 
that  there  is  absolutely  no  room  for  questioning  it. 
Clement  of  Rome  (96)  quotes  it  by  name  in  his  letter 
to  the  Corinthians^  ascribing  it  to  Paul.  Ignatius 
(115),  Polycarp  (116),  Justin  Martyr  (145),  Irenaeus 
(175),  Tertullian  (190),  and  Clement  of  Alexandria 
(195), —  all  these  quote  it,  the  latter  three  by  name, 
ascribing  it  to  the  Apostle:  Thus  we  have  an  un- 
broken line  of  witnesses  to  it  from  the  last  decade 
of  the  first  century.  And  the  internal  evidence  is 
just  as  strong  and  positive.  The  Apostle  reveals 
himself  at  every  step  in  the  Epistle.  Thus  it  claims 
to  be  by  Paul,  and  its  language  and  thoughts  are  so 
unmistakably  Pauline  that  few  critics  have  ever  had 
the  hardihood  to  deny  its  Pauline  authorship.     In- 


FIRST  CORINTHIANS.  125 

deed  there  are  so  many  allusions  to  the  Apostle's 
movements,  and  so  many  expressions  of  his  personal 
feelings  abound  throughout  the  whole  Epistle,  that 
its  authenticity  and  genuineness  are  conclusively 
and  absolutely  established. 

//.   The  Corinthian  Church. 

Corinth  was  one  of  the  important  cities  of  Paul's 
day.  The  city,  however,  that  Paul  knew  was  not 
the  proud  city  that  had  stood  at  the  head  of  the 
Achaean  league.  That  old  city  was  destroyed  by 
the  Romans  in  146  B.  C.  Upon  the  ruins  one  hun- 
dred years  later  a  new  city  arose  under  the  fostering 
care  of  Julius  Caesar,  who  made  it  a  Roman  colony. 
It  was  situated  on  the  isthmus  connecting  the  Pelo- 
ponnesus with  Greece  proper.  It  soon  became, 
under  its  new  auspices,  a  great  commercial  center 
on  account  of  its  commanding  position  on  the  great 
thoroughfare  of  commerce.  Through  its  seaports, 
Lechaeum  and  Cenchrea,  the  one  on  the  north  and 
the  other  on  the  south  of  the  isthmus,  which  were 
connected  by  a  ship-canal,  the  commerce  of  East 
and  West  continually  passed.  It  became  a  great 
commercial  center  into  which  all  nationalities  flowed. 
Wealth  and  magnificence  adorned  it  on  every  side. 
But  its  beauty  was  marred  by  the  fact  that  its  re- 
ligions pandered  to  the  basest  passions  of  men. 
Celebrated  for  its  splendor,  it  also  became  infamous 
on  account  of  its  frightful  immorality.  Its  very 
name  was  the  synonym  for  the  worst  forms  of 
debauchery. 

To  this  city  the  Apostle  came  late  in  the  year  52 
A.  D.     Here  he  soon  found  congenial  companions  in 


126  THE  PAULINE  EPISTLES, 

the  persons  of  Aquila  and  Priscilla,  who  as  Jews 
had  been  expelled  from  Rome  in  accordance  with 
the  edict  issued  by  the  Emperor  Claudius  against  the 
Jews  residing  in  that  city.  These  persons  were  tent- 
makers  by  trade,  and  were  also  very  probably  Chris- 
tians. This  community  of  occupation  and  faith, 
especially  the  latter,  would  operate  to  bind  them 
very  closely  together.  The  Apostle  worked  at  his 
trade  in  order  to  obtain  his  living,  but  at  the  same 
time  he  lost  no  opportunity  of  preaching  Christ. 
Paul  seems  to  have  labored  at  first  at  Corinth  under 
great  depression  of  spirits.  At  length  Silas  and 
Timothy  arrived  from  Macedonia.  Their  coming 
stimulated  the  great  missionary  to  increased  ear- 
nestness and  activity.  "  And  when  Silas  and  Timo- 
thy were  come  from  Macedonia,  Paul  was  pressed  in 
the  spirit  and  testified  to  the  Jews  that  Jesus  was 
Christ "  (Acts  i8  : 5).  This  increased  zeal  aroused 
the  slumbering  opposition  of  the  Corinthian  Jews  in 
whose  Synagogue  the  Apostle  had  been  preaching. 
They  drove  him  from  their  place  of  worship,  but  this 
did  not  happen  until  a  number  of  converts  had  been 
made,  among  whom  was  Crispus,  the  chief  ruler  of 
the  Synagogue.  Driven  out  of  their  Synagogue  by 
the  Jews,  the  Apostle  turned  his  attention  to  the 
Gentiles.  It  was  at  this  critical  moment  that  the 
Lord  appeared  to  Paul  in  a  vision,  and  encouraged 
him  by  saying,  **  Be  not  afraid,  but  speak  and  hold 
not  thy  peace  ;  for  I  am  with  thee,  and  no  man  shall 
set  on  thee  to  hurt  thee  ;  for  I  have  much  people  in 
this  city."  Paul's  continued  success  intensified  the 
hostility  of  the  Jews,  and  when  Gallio,  the  brother  of 
the  philosopher  Seneca,  became  the  deputy  of  Achaia, 


FIRST  CORINTHIANS.  127 

they  thought  that  they  could  obtain  from  him  a 
judgment  that  would  silence  the  zealous  Apostle. 
Their  well-known  failure  (Acts  i8  :  12-17)  shows  how 
they  over-reached  themselves,  and  only  contributed 
further  success  to  the  work  of  the  missionaries,  for 
the  outcome  of  the  whole  affair  was  that  Paul  thence- 
forth had  easier  access  to  the  Gentiles,  who  at  the 
time  rather  espoused  his  cause  on  account  of  their 
own  hatred  of  the  Jews. 

At  the  end  of  eighteen  months,  in  the  Spring  of 
54  A.  D.,  the  Apostle  departed  for  Ephesus,  leaving 
behind  him  in  Corinth  a  flourishing  Christian  com- 
munity. For  some  reason  he  took  with  him  Aquila 
and  Priscilla,  whom  he  had  led  to  a  clearer  percep- 
tion of  Christian  truth.  After  a  short  stay  in  Ephe- 
sus, Aquila  and  Priscilla  remaining  there,  Paul  went 
to  Jerusalem,  his  purpose  being  to  attend  the  Feast 
of  Pentecost,  which  occurred  that  year  on  May  31. 
From  Jerusalem  he  went  to  Syrian  Antioch  where 
he  spent  a  few  weeks.  Leaving  Antioch,  he  started 
out  on  his  third  missionary  journey,  reaching  Ephe- 
sus late  in  54  A.  D.,  where  he  remained  until  Pente- 
cost 57  A.  D.,  and  from  whence  he  wrote  this  First 
Epistle  to  the  Corinthians. 

The  Church  at  Corinth  was  composed  mainly  of 
Gentiles.  "  The  greater  part  of  this  Epistle  has 
reference  to  questions  that  would  naturally  arise 
among  Gentile  converts  ;  and  Paul  could  say  of  the 
Church  collectively,  '  Ye  know  that  ye  were  Gentiles, 
carried  away  unto  these  dumb  idols,  even  as  ye  were 
led'"  (i  Cor.  12:2).  With  few  exceptions  these 
Christians  were  poor  and  unlearned  (i  :  26).  Nor 
were  there  many  of  the  higher  ranks  in  life,  except 


128  THE  PAULINE  EPISTLES. 

Crispus,  the  former  ruler  of  the  Synagogue,  Erastus 
the  City  Chamberlain,  and  one  Gaius.  Sometime 
after  Paul  departed  from  Corinth,  another  promi- 
nent worker  became  associated  with  the  Corinthian 
Church.  Apollos,  an  Alexandrian  Jew,  who  had 
previously  become  a  disciple  of  John  the  Baptist, 
came  to  Ephesus.  Aquila  and  Priscilla  having 
come  in  contact  with  this  man,  gave  him  some 
needed  instruction  in  Christian  truth.  Hearing  from 
them  of  the  Christian  work  in  Corinth,  he  desired 
to  assist  in  it.  "And  when  he  was  disposed  to  pass 
into  Achaia,  the  brethren  (of  Ephesus)  wrote,  ex- 
horting the  disciples  (of  Corinth)  to  receive  him  ; 
who,  when  he  was  come,  helped  them  much  which 
believed  through  grace  ;  for  he  mightily  convinced 
the  Jews,  and  that  publicly,  showing  by  the  Script- 
ures that  Jesus  was  Christ "  (Acts  18:24-28).  This 
man's  coming  to  Corinth  was  in  many  ways  a  great 
help,  for  he  watered  with  his  eloquence  the  seed  that 
Paul  had  planted. 

///.     Occasion  and  Object  of  the  Epistle. 

Toward  the  close  of  his  residence  in  Ephesus  the 
Apostle  received  word  of  a  very  distressing  state  of 
affairs  in  Corinth.  He  doubtless  was  not  wholly  un- 
prepared for  the  news,  but  members  of  the  household 
of  Chloe  brought  him  a  full  account  of  affairs.  Apol- 
los seems  to  have  returned  to  Ephesus  at  this  junc- 
ture, and  then  a  committee  from  the  Corinthian 
Church,  consisting  of  Stephanas,  Fortunatus,  and 
Achaicus,  waited  upon  the  Apostle,  bringing  a 
letter  in  which  were  submitted  to  him  for  solution 
some  perplexing  questions.     Judaizing  teachers  had 


FIRST  CORINTHIANS.  129 

made  their  appearance  in  Corinth,  and  had  set  them- 
selves at  work  to  undermine  Paul's  authority  ;  while 
the  Church  itself  had  become  disturbed  beyond 
measure.  "  The  Church  was  split  up  into  factions. 
Sins  of  uncleanness,  so  prevalent  and  regarded  with 
indifference  at  Corinth,  had  polluted  the  Christian 
Church  ;  the  Christians  had  not  completely  cast  off 
the  old  man  ;  and  especially  an  offense  of  this  nature 
of  a  peculiarly  aggravated  description  had  occurred, 
and  the  offender  had  not  been  expelled  from  the 
Christian  community.  A  litigious  spirit  had  arisen. 
Disputes  had  been  carried  to  such  an  extent,  that 
Christian  arbitration  was  rejected,  and  brother  went 
to  law  with  brother,  and  that  before  unbelievers. 
The  religious  assemblies  of  the  Church  frequently 
exhibited  scenes  of  confusion  ;  several  prophesied  at 
once  ;  others  spake  with  tongues,  when  there  was  no 
interpreter  ;  women  appeared  in  those  assemblies  in 
unbecoming  attire  ;  and  even  the  Agapae  and  the 
Lord's  Supper  were  so  profaned,  that  excess  in  eat- 
ing and  drinking  was  not  unfrequent  at  their  celebra- 
tion. Several  Christians,  also,  making  a  parade  of 
their  liberty,  seem  to  have  attended  the  sacrificial 
banquets  held  in  the  heathen  temples.  And  there 
were  some  who  went  the  length  of  denying  or  calling 
in  question  the  doctrine  of  a  resurrection, —  perhaps 
even  the  idea  of  a  future  life."  ^^ 

It  is  plain  that  a  number  of  difficult  questions 
were  submitted  to  the  Apostle  for  his  judgment. 
And  there  was  need  for  a  clear  and  positive  letter 
from  the  Apostle.  The  object  in  view  in  writing 
this   letter   was    twofold,    namely :    first,   to    correct 

i^Gloag's  Iijtrod.  to  the  Pauline  Epistles,  p.  179. 

9 


130  THE  PAULINE  EPISTLES. 

the  disorders  that  had  arisen,  and  second,  to  answer 
the  questions  submitted  to  him.  At  the  same  time 
Paul  embraces  the  opportunity  for  urging  the  col- 
lection for  the  poor  saints  at  Jerusalem. 

As  Timothy  had  been  sent  by  Paul  on  some 
errand  to  Macedonia  and  Achaia  (Acts  19  :  22)  some 
time  before  this,  it  was  manifest  that  he  could  not 
have  been  the  bearer  of  this  letter.  And  the  refer- 
ences to  Timothy  in  this  letter  make  it  plain  that 
Paul  did  not  expect  that  he  would  reach  Corinth 
until  after  they  had  received  it  (4:17;  16:10). 
Judging  from  a  reference  in  the  Second  Epistle  (12  : 
17,  18),  Titus  was  the  bearer  of  this  Epistle.  It  is 
probable  also  that  the  three  Corinthians,  Stephanas, 
Fortunatus,  and  Achaicus,  returned  with  him.  The 
Apostle  desired  to  have  Apollos  go  with  them,  but 
for  some  reason,  possibly  he  may  have  thought  that 
his  presence  might  aggravate  the  factious  spirit 
there,  he  decided  not  to  go  at  that  time  (16:12). 
Sosthenes,  who  is  associated  with  Paul  in  the  salu- 
tation of  the  Epistle,  is  unknown  to  us  from  any 
other  source.  The  Corinthians  doubtless  had  some 
acquaintance  with  him.  He  may  have  acted  as 
Paul's  amanuensis  on  this   occasion. 

IV.  Outlme  of  the  Epistle. 

The  diversified  contents  of  the  Epistle  make  it 
difficult  to  give  an  outline,  but  the  following  will 
indicate  the  general  contents  of  the  Epistle  :  — 

I.   Greeting  and  thanksgiving,      i  :  1-9. 
(  2j  The  party-spirit  in  the  church,  with  a  detailed 
justification   of  Paul's   method   of  teaching,     i  :  10- 
4:21. 


FIRST  CORINTHIANS.  131 

3.  Disorders  in  the  Church.     5  : 1-6  :  20. 
^(i.)'^The  incestuous  offender.     5  : 1-13. 
/ (2.)^ Their  lawsuits.     6  :  i-ii. 

(3.)  On  impurity  in  general.     6:12-20. 

4.  Answers  to  inquiries  in  regard  to,  7  :  I-15  158. 
(i.)   Marriage.     7:1-40. 

f  (2.)  pleats  offered  to  idols,  with  digression  as 
to  the  way  he  had  acted.     8  :  1-9  :  27. 
(3.)  Warnings  against  the  abuse  of  their  liberty. 

10:  1-33. 
(4.)  Regulations   for    public    worship.       ii:i- 

,14:40. 
(^(«.)'iAs  to  head  coverings.      11  :  1-16. 
r(^.)\As  to  the  Agapae  and  the  Lord's  Supper. 

11:17-34. 
{c,)  As  to  spiritual   gifts,  with  digression   in 
the  magnificent  eulogy  on  love  (13  :  i- 
X  13).      12:1-14:40. 

(^(5.))The  Resurrection.      15  :  1-58. 

5.  Directions  as  to  the  collections  for  the  poor. 
16 :  1-4. 

6.  Personal  messages  and  exhortations.    16:5-18. 

7.  Salutations.     16  :  19,  20. 

8.  Autographic  conclusion.      16:21-24. 

V.  Date  and  Place  of  Composition. 

This  is  quite  easily  determined.  When  he  wrote, 
he  was  expecting  to  remain  at  Ephesus  until  Pente- 
cost. He  was  making  his  preparations  to  leave 
Ephesus  to  go  to  Macedonia  and  from  thence  to 
Corinth.  He  had  been  in  Ephesus  since  late  in  54 
A.  D.,  and  he  left  that  city  immediately  after  Pente- 
cost 57  A,   D.     In  accordance  with   these  facts  the 


132  THE  PAULINE  EPISTLES. 

date  of  composition  was  a  short  time  previous  to 
Pentecost  of  57  A.  D.,  and  the  place  where  it  was 
written  was  Ephesus. 

VI.  Concluding  Remarks, 

This  is  an  intensely  practical  Epistle,  and  it 
should  be  carefully  studied  for  the  light  it  throws 
upon  the  many  questions  that  arise  in  regard  to 
Christian  conduct.  It  is  the  book  in  which  to  find 
instruction  for  all  time  on  questions  concerning 
Christian  freedom  and  conduct.  *'  The  brevity  and 
yet  completeness  with  which  intricate  practical 
problems  are  discussed,  the  unerring  firmness  with 
which  through  all  plausible  sophistry  and  fallacious 
scruples  the  radical  principle  is  laid  hold  of,  and  the 
sharp  finality  with  which  it  is  expressed,  reveal  not 
merely  the  bright-eyed  sagacity  and  thorough  Chris- 
tian feeling  of  Paul,  but  also  his  measureless  intel- 
lectual vigor,  while  such  a  passage  as  the  thirteenth 
chapter  betrays  that  strong  and  sane  imagination 
which  can  hold  in  view  a  wide  field  of  human  life, 
and  the  fifteenth  rises  from  a  basis  of  keen  cut  and 
solidly  laid  reasoning  to  the  most  dignified  and  stir- 
ring eloquence.  It  was  a  happy  circumstance  for 
the  future  of  Christianity  that  in  these  early  days, 
when  there  were  almost  as  many  wild  suggestions 
and  foolish  opinions  as  there  were  converts,  there 
should  have  been  this  one  clear  practical  judgment, 
the  embodiment  of  Christian  wisdom.  "^^ 

In  this  Epistle  the  Apostle  appears  before  us  as  a 
strange  mixture  of  tenderness  and  severity.  "  At 
one  time  he  rebukes  with  impassioned  severity ;  at 

i7Dods'  Introd.  to  the  N.  T.,  p.  103. 


^ 


SECOND  CORINTHIANS.  133 

another  he  entreats  with  the  tenderness  of  a  loving 
mother  mourning  over  her  erring  children."  And 
nowhere  does  his  princely  intellect  shine  out  more 
clearly  than  in  some  of  the  thrilling,  soul-stirring 
passages  of  this  Epistle.  How  many  Christian 
graves  have  been  made  to  appear  as  the  gate- 
way to  heaven  by  the  reading  thereat  of  the 
fifteenth  chapter !  And  where  in  all  the  range  of 
human  literature  is  to  be  found  a  passage  equal  to 
the  description  of  love  in  the  thirteenth  chapter  ? 
And  how  often  the  sacramental  hosts  of  God's  elect 
have  been  thrilled  by  hearing  read  the  words  of  in- 
stitution, recorded  in  ii 123-29,  as  they  approached 
the  Lord's  Table  ! 

V.   THE   SECOND   EPISTLE   TO   THE    CORINTHIANS. 
/.  Canonicity. 

The  external  testimony  to  this  Epistle  is  not 
quite  as  strong  as  that  to  the  First.  It  is,  however, 
by  no  means  weak,  or  even  unsatisfactory.  Polycarp 
(116)  plainly  quotes  it.  The  writer  of  the  Epistle  to 
Diognetus  (117),  Theophilus  of  Antioch  (168-182), 
Athenagoras  (177),  betray  its  influence  on  them. 
Marcion  (130)  included  it  in  his  list;  so  also  is  it 
found  in  the  Muratori  Canon  (170).  The  Syriac 
(160)  and  Old  Latin  (170)  Versions  contain  it.  Then 
Irenaeus  (175),  Tertullian  (190),  and  Clement  of  Alex- 
andria (195),  quote  it  by  name  as  a  genuine  Pauline 
Epistle.  The  internal  evidence  is  along  the  same 
line.  The  Epistle  claims  to  be  by  Paul,  and  all  of 
its  historical  allusions  bear  out  this  claim.  "  No  one 
can  read  the  two  Epistles  to  the  Corinthians  with  at- 


134  THE  PAULINE  EPISTLES. 

tention,  without  being  satisfied  that  the  writer  of  the 
First  was  also  the  writer  of  the  Second.  The  char- 
acter of  the  author  is  the  same  :  there  is  the  same 
combination  of  severity  and  tenderness  ;  at  one  time 
the  stern  reprover  of  sin,  and  at  another  the  tender 
parent  mourning  over  the  delinquencies  of  his  chil- 
dren ;  at  one  time  threatening  the  Corinthians  that 
if  he  should  come  again  he  would  not  spare  (2  Cor. 
13  :2),  and  at  another  time  writing  unto  them  with 
many  tears  (2  Cor.  2  :  4).  The  style  is  undoubtedly 
that  of  Paul."  ^*  And  this  is  rendered  all  the  more  cer- 
tain by  the  manifest  harmony  between  the  state- 
ments made  in  the  Acts  and  those  in  these  two 
Epistles.  ^^  Indeed  so  closely  arc  the  two  Epistles 
related,  that  the  arguments  in  support  of  the  First 
Epistle  help  to  establish  the  Second  as  well.  We 
may  consider  the  position  of  this  Epistle  in  the 
New   Testament   as  impregnable. 

//.   To   Whom   Written. 

The  First  Epistle  is  addressed  "  unto  the  church 
of  God  which  is  at  Corinth  .  .  .  with  all  that  in 
every  place  call  upon  the  name  of  Jesus  Christ  our 
Lord."  A  good  deal  of  controversy  has  been  waged 
over  the  meaning  of  this  last  clause  ;  but,  consider- 
ing the  special  character  of  the  Epistle,  addressed 
as  it  was  to  the  immediate  condition  of  the  Corinth- 
ians, it  seems  best  to  understand  it  "in  a  sense  of 
topographical  restriction  to  the  province  of  Achaia." 
There  was  a  church  at  Cenchrea  (Rom.  16  :  i),  one 
of  the  ports  of  Corinth,  and   there   doubtless  were 

^^Gloag's  Introd.  to  the  Pauline  Epistles,  p.  204. 
i^See  Paley's  Horse  Paulinse. 


SECOND  CORINTHIANS.  135 

other  churches  in  the  same  neighborhood.  This 
Second  Epistle  is  addressed  '*  unto  the  church  of 
God  which  is  at  Corinth,  with  all  the  saints  which 
are  in  all  Achaia."  It  is  manifest  that  both  of  these 
Epistles  were  primarily  intended  for  the  church  at 
Corinth  ;  but  if,  as  seems  evident,  there  were  other 
churches  in  close  relation  geographically  and  other- 
wise to  the  Corinthian  church,  there  was  need  of 
including  them  in  the  salutations.  Churches  in  such 
relation  to  the  Corinthian  church  would  be  likely  to 
have  about  the  same  needs  as  their  mother-church 
had.  This  Epistle,  accordingly,  was  addressed  to 
the  same  circle  of  readers  mentioned  in  the  First 
Epistle. 

///.    The  Occasion  and  Object  of  this  Epistle. 

The  Apostle  remained  in  Ephesus  for  a  time  after 
having  sent  his  First  Epistle  to  the  Corinthians. 
Leaving  Ephesus  at  length  immediately  after  Pente- 
cost 57  A.  D.,  Paul  journeyed  to  Troas.  At  this 
point  he  had  expected  to  meet  Titus  on  his  way 
back  from  Corinth  with  a  full  account  of  the  recep- 
tion of  the  First  Epistle  by  the  Corinthian  Chris- 
tians. Great  was  his  disappointment  when  Titus 
failed  to  appear.  At  lengtji,  although  a  door  was 
opened  to  him  at  Troas  to  preach  the  Gospel,  he 
pressed  on  across  the  ^gean  Sea  to  Macedonia, 
hoping  thereby  to  meet  Titus  all  the  sooner.  His 
feverish  anxiety  to  hear  from  Corinth  would  not 
permit  him  to  remain  at  Troas,  for,  he  says,  ''  I  had 
no  rest  in  my  spirit,  because  I  found  not  Titus  my 
brother  :  but  taking  my  leave  of  them  [of  Troas],  I 
went  from  thence  into  Macedonia"  (2  Cor.  2:13). 


136  THE  PAULINE  EPISTLES. 

And  even  in  Macedonia  the  same  anxiety  was  upon 
him  until  Titus  came.  ''For,  when  we  were  come 
into  Macedonia,  our  flesh  had  no  rest,  but  we 
were  troubled  on  every  side  ;  without  were  fight- 
ings, within  were  fears.  Nevertheless  God  that 
comforteth  those  that  are  cast  down,  comforted 
us  by  the  coming  of  Titus"  (2  Cor.  7:5,  6).  Just 
at  what  point  Titus  and  Paul  met,  we  have  no  means 
of  telling.  Immediately  the  Apostle  wrote  this  Sec- 
ond Epistle  which  he  sent  by  the  hand  of  Titus  who 
was  accompanied  by  two  others.  "And  we  have 
sent  with  him  the  brother,  whose  praise  is  in  the 
gospel  throughout  the  churches"  (8:18).  It  has 
been  conjectured,  and  indeed  we  have  an  early 
tradition  to  this  effect,  that  this  person  was  none 
other  than  Luke  the  historian,  who  rejoined  the 
Apostle  when  he  reached  Philippi  on  this  his  third 
journey.  Luke  remained  at  Philippi  when  Paul  left 
that  city  on  his  second  journey  and  very  probably 
he  spent  the  intervening  time  at  that  place.  ''And 
we  have  sent  with  him  our  brother  whom  we  have 
oftentimes  proved  diligent  in  many  things  "  (8  :  22). 
Who  this  third  person  was  we  have  no  means  of 
telling.  It  may  possibly  have  been  either  Apollos 
or  Sosthenes. 

It  is  to  be  noted  that  Timothy  is  associated  with 
Paul  in  the  salutations  of  this  Epistle.  From  this 
fact  it  is  evident  that  he  had  returned  from  his  jour- 
ney into  Macedonia  and  Achaia  (Acts  19  :  22  ;  i  Cor. 
4 :  17).  When  the  Apostle  wrote  his  First  Epistle  to 
the  Corinthians,  he  expected  that  it  would  reach  its 
destination  before  Timothy  arrived  there  (i  Cor.  16: 
10 ;  4  :  17).     Here  we  have  Timothy  with  Paul  again. 


SECOND  CORINTHIANS.  137 

Some  writers  have  advanced  the  idea  that  Timothy 
did  not  carry  out  the  plan  of  the  Apostle  that  he 
should  go  to  Achaia  as  well  as  to  Macedonia,  but 
that  he  had  rejoined  Paul's  company  in  Macedonia 
and  had  not  gone  to  Achaia  at  all.  The  reason 
given  for  this  idea  is  that  Paul  nowhere  in  this  Epis- 
tle attributes  his  knowledge  of  Corinthian  affairs  to 
information  derived  from  Timothy,  but  from  Titus. 
But  we  have  no  evidence  of  Timothy's  having  failed 
to  carry  out  Paul's  plan  for  his  movements  as  indi- 
cated in  the  First  Epistle.  Indeed  if  Timothy  had 
failed  to  reach  Corinth  as  promised  in  the  First  Epis- 
tle, it  would  have  been  necessary  to  explain  this  fail- 
ure in  this  Epistle.  It  would  only  have  given  further 
occasion  to  Paul's  enemies  to  accuse  him  of  vacilla- 
tion and  failure  to  keep  his  promises,  if  Timothy,  who 
is  always  so  closely  associated  with  him,  had  failed 
to  go  to  Corinth.  We  must  infer  then  that  Timothy 
did  go  to  Corinth.  It  is  probable  that  he  remained 
there  but  a  short  time,  and  departed  again  before  the 
full  effects  of  Paul's  First  Epistle  were  manifest.  And 
the  fact  that  he  is  associated  with  the  Apostle  in  the 
greetings  of  this  Epistle  is  sufficient  reason  for  his 
naming  Titus  as  the  channel  of  his  information. 
Timothy  undoubtedly  brought  some  news,  but  it 
was  upon  Titus,  the  bearer  of  the  First  Epistle,  that 
Paul  depended  for  full  information. 

This  information  brought  by  Titus  was  not  alto- 
gether satisfactory.  The  majority  of  the  church  had 
submitted  to  the  Apostle  and  were  loyal  to  him  once 
more  ;  the  chief  offender  against  the  purity  of  the 
church  had  been  excommunicated  and  had  repented  ; 
and  there  was  deep  grief  over  the  disorders  that  had 


138  THE  PAULINE  EPISTLES. 

arisen.  But  while  the  majority  had  submitted,  there 
was  still  a  vigorous  faction  that  refused  to  recognize 
the  Apostle's  authority.  These  persons  had  trumped 
up  new  charges  against  Paul.  "Their  animosity  to 
the  Apostle  was  greater  than  when  he  wrote  the 
First  Epistle.  They  brought  forward  new  charges. 
They  accused  Paul  of  lightness  and  irresolution, — 
changing  his  mind,  purposing  at  one  time  to  come 
and  at  another  time  resolving  not  to  come,  as  if  he 
were  afraid  (2  Cor.  i  :  16-18).  They  charged  him 
with  pride  and  arrogance, — seeking  to  exalt  himself 
above  them,  and  to  exercise  a  dominion  over  their 
faith  (2  Cor.  i  :  24).  They  insinuated  that  he  was 
artful  and  cunning  in  his  conduct  (2  Cor.  12  :  16). 
They  openly  denied  his  apostleship,  and  refused  to 
acknowledge  his  authority  (2  Cor.  12:11,  12).  And 
they  contrasted  the  severity  and  boldness  of  his  let- 
ters with  the  weakness  and  contemptible  nature  of 
his  personal  appearance"^*'  (2  Cor.  10:10). 

"The  calumnies  of  his  opponents  had  wounded 
him  deeply,  especially  as  they  touched  points  where 
his  best  intentions  had  been  twisted  by  them  into 
the  very  opposite.  He  wrote  under  great  excitement, 
the  throbs  of  which  are  felt  throughout  the  Epistle.  "^^ 
The  purpose  of  the  Apostle  in  writing  this  Second 
Epistle  was  to  confirm  and  commend  the  obedient 
portion  of  the  church,  and  also  to  meet  and  over- 
throw the  charges  and  new  insinuations  of  his  ene- 
mies. He  also  used  the  opportunity  for  further 
directions  and  exhortations  in  regard  to  the  collec- 
tion for  the  poor  saints  in  Jerusalem.  Meyer  writes, 
*'The  aim  of  the  Epistle  is  stated  by  Paul  himself  at 

20 Gloag's Introd.  to  the  Pauline  Epistles,  p.  2il. 
»i  Weiss'  Introd.,  Vol.  L,  p.  285. 


SECOND  CORINTHIANS.  139 

13  :  10,  viz  :  to  put  the  church  before  his  arrival  into 
that  frame  of  mind  which  it  was  necessary  that  he 
should  find,  in  order  that  he  might  thereupon  set  to 
work  among  them,  not  with  stern,  corrective  au- 
thority, but  for  their  edification.  But  in  order  to 
attain  this  aim,  he  had  to  make  it  his  chief  task  to 
elucidate,  confirm,  and  vindicate  his  apostolic  author- 
ity, which,  in  consequence  of  his  former  letter,  had 
been  assailed  still  more  vehemently,  openly  and  in- 
fluentially  by  his  opponents.  For  if  that  were  re- 
gained, if  the  church  were  again  confirmed  on  that 
point,  and  the  opposition  defeated,  every  hindrance 
to  his  successful  personal  labor  among  them  would 
be  removed.  With  the  establishment  of  his  apos- 
tolic character  and  reputation,  he  is  therefore  chiefly 
occupied  in  the  whole  Epistle  ;  everything  else  is 
only  subordinate,  including  a  detailed  appeal  respect- 
ing the  collection."  ^^ 

IV.    The  Otitline  of  the  Epistle, 

This  is  even  more  difficult  to  give  of  this  Epistle 
than  it  was  of  the  former.  Here  the  development  of 
thought  is  not  systematic  and  logical.  The  ex- 
tremely personal  character  of  the  Epistle  largely 
accounts  for  this.  There  are,  however,  three  quite 
well  marked  main  parts  to  it. 
I.  Hortatory,     i  :  1-7  :  13. 

I.  Greeting  and  thanksgiving,      i  :  i-ii. 
/  2.\Reasons  for   the    changes  in  his  plans,     i: 
12-24. 
3.  Expressions  of  gratitude  at  their  obedience 
and  recommendation  of  restoration  of  the 
repentant  offender.     2  :  i-ii. 

**  Meyer's  Commentary  on  2  Cor.,  p.  128. 


140  THE  PAULINE  EPISTLES. 

4.  His  great  anxiety  for  them,  until  he  heard 

from  Titus  about  them.     2  :  12-17. 

5.  Contrasts  the  glorious  nature  of  the  Gospel 

with  the  law.     3  :  1-18. 

6.  Describes   the    difficulties    encountered    by 

himself     4  :  1-15. 

7.  The  future  rewards,  however,  strengthened 

him.     4  :  16-5  :  13. 

8.  The   love  of  Christ  the  mainspring  of  his 

life.     5  :  14-21. 

9.  Beseeches  them  to  be  pure  and  holy  in  their 

lives.     6  : 1-7  :  i. 
10.  Speaks  again  of  his  anxiety  about  them  and 
the  comfort  Titus'  message  brought  him. 

7:2-13. 

II.  Directions  about  the  collection  and  the  mat- 
ters of  Christian  giving  generally.     8  :  1-9  :  15. 

1.  Informs  them  of  the  example  of  the  Mace- 

donians.    8 : 1-5. 

2.  The  mission  of  Titus  in  regard  to  this  col- 

lection.    8  : 6-24. 

3.  Exhorts  them  to  be  ready  with  their  offer- 

ing.    9:1-15- 

III.  Severe  and  threatening  vindication  of  himself 
to  the  impenitent  portion  of  the  Church.  10 :  i- 
13  :  14. 

1.  Answers  the  slanders  of  his  opponents,  and 

details  with  reluctance  what  he  had  suf- 
fered for  Christ,  and  tells  of  the  special 
revelations  given  to  him.      10 :  1-12  :  10. 

2.  Continues  his  personal  defense.      12  :  11-21. 

3.  Announces  his  coming  to  them.     13  :  i. 

4.  Tells  them  that  he  will  not  spare  them  if  he 

found  need  for  severity.     13:2-10. 


SECOND   CORINTHIANS.  141 

5.  Farewell   exhortation    and   salutation.     13  ; 

11-13. 

6.  Apostolic  benediction.      13  :  14. 

V.  Date  and  Place  of  Composition. 

The  First  Epistle  was  written  at  Ephesus,  some- 
time between  Passover  and  Pentecost  of  57  A.  D. 
This  Second  Epistle  followed  it  after  an  interval  of 
a  few  weeks,  or  at  most  a  few  months.  It  was 
written  from  some  point  in  Macedonia,  very  prob- 
ably not  at  Philippi,  as  we  have  no  reason  for  be- 
lieving that  Titus  met  Paul  there.  There  would 
doubtless  have  been  some  reference  to  Philippi  in 
the  Epistle,  if  it  had  been  written  from  that  place. 
It  was  the  original  plan  of  the  Apostle  to  go  from 
Ephesus  direct  to  Corinth  and  from  thence  to 
Macedonia.  But  when  he  heard  from  Corinth  in 
regard  to  the  sad  state  of  affairs  there,  it  seemed 
best  to  defer  his  visit  until  he  had  re-established  his 
authority  among  them  by  his  letter  (2  Cor.  1:15, 
16,  23).  When  he  wrote  his  First  Epistle,  he  said, 
"■  Now  I  will  come  unto  you  when  I  shall  pass 
through  Macedonia,  for  I  do  pass  through  Mace- 
donia. And  it  may  be  that  I  will  abide,  yea,  and 
winter  with  you,  that  ye  may  bring  me  on  my 
journey  whithersoever  I  go.  For  I  will  not  see  you 
now  by  the  way  ;  but  I  trust  to  tarry  awhile  with 
you,  if  the  Lord  permit"  (i  Cor.  16:  5-7).  This  is 
the  announcement  of  the  change  in  his  plans,  and  in 
2  Cor.  1:15,  16,  23,  he  explains  this  change  of  plans. 
Paul  departed  then  from  Ephesus  after  Pentecost 
57  A.  D.  (i  Cor.  16  :  8),  and  passed  by  way  of  Troas 
into  Macedonia.  It  was  somewhere  in  that  prov- 
ince that  he  met  Titus,  and  he  immediately  wrote 


142  THE  PAULINE  EPISTLES, 

this  Epistle,  that  is,  during  the  latter  part  of  the 
Summer  of  57  A.  D.  In  his  Epistle  to  the  Romans, 
written  in  February,  58  A.  D.,  he  speaks  of  having 
preached  the  Gospel  of  Christ  round  about  unto 
Illyricum  (Rom.  15  :  19).  It  was  during  this  same 
Summer  and  the  subsequent  Fall  that  he  did  this, 
arriving  finally  at  Corinth  about  December,  57  A.  D., 
where  he  spent  the  following  three  months  (Acts 
20:2,3). 

VL  Conclusion. 

There  are  two  other  questions  involved  in  the 
study  of  the  Epistles  to  the  Corinthians,  that  demand 
some  consideration. 

I.  Did  Paul  visit  Corinth  a  second  time  before 
writing  his  Epistles  to  the  Christians  of  that  city  1 
So  far  as  the  book  of  the  Acts  is  concerned  there  is 
nothing  even  to  suggest  this  question,  for  it  seems 
on  the  contrary  to  preclude  the  possibility  of  a  visit 
there  during  the  three  years'  residence  in  Ephesus. 
But  when  we  examine  certain  references  in  the 
Second  Epistle  (2:1;  12  :  14 ;  13  :  i),we  are  led  to 
ask  whether  Paul  did  not  make  a  visit  to  Corinth 
that  is  not  recorded  in  the  Acts.  In  13:2  wc  read, 
**  I  told  you  before,  and  foretell  you,  as  if  I  were 
present,  the  second  time  ;  .  .  .  that  if  I  come  again, 
I  will  not  spare."  If  this  translation  is  correct,  the 
approaching  visit  would  be  the  second,  but  if  we 
adopt  the  rendering  of  the  Revised  Version,  which 
reads,  '*  I  have  said  beforehand,  and  I  do  say  before- 
hand, as  when  I  was  present  the  second  time,"  etc., 
the  approaching  visit  would  be  the  third.  Some 
maintain  that  when  Paul  says,  "  This  is  the  third 
time  I  am  coming  to  you,"  he  means  that  it  was  the 


SECOND   CORINTHIANS.  143 

third  time  he  was  ready  to  do  so,  but  that  he  did 
not  actually  go  a  second  time  until  after  these  let- 
ters were  written.  But  in  2  Cor.  2  :  i  he  writes,  "  I 
determined  this  with  myself  that  I  would  not  come 
again  to  you  in  heaviness."  When  did  he  go  to 
them  in  heaviness }  This  could  not  have  been  at 
the  time  of  his  first  visit,  for  this  heaviness  was 
occasioned  by  the  conduct  of  the  Corinthians.  It 
is  true  that  he  seems  to  have  been  depressed  in 
spirit  when  he  went  to  Corinth  from  Athens  on  his 
second  missionary  journey  (Acts  18  :  5),  but  this 
depression,  if  there  was  any,  was  not  caused  by 
the  Corinthians.  Now  it  seems  from  all  these  pas- 
sages that  the  approaching  visit  would  be  the  third. 
But  when  was  the  second  made }  It  must  have 
been  before  the  composition  of  the  First  Epistle. 
The  means  of  communication  between  Ephesus  and 
Corinth  were  easy  and  numerous.  Paul  very  prob- 
ably heard  such  unsatisfactory  news  from  Corinth 
that  some  time  during  his  Ephesian  residence  he 
took  a  hurried  and  brief  trip  there.  At  that  time 
in  great  grief  he  had  tried  mild  measures  for  the 
correction  of  the  abuses  that  were  spreading.  That 
visit  had  been  a  painful  one  to  him,  and  it  had  been 
a  time  of  humiliation.  But  those  mild  measures  had 
not  been  successful,  and  when  he  learned  this  he 
wrote  his  letters,  in  the  latter  of  which,  he  informed 
them  plainly  that  when  he  came  again  he  would  not 
spare,  that  he  would  be  as  severe  as  the  occasion 
demanded.  ^^ 

23  In  support  of  this  unrecorded  visit  are  the  following  writers : 
Conybeare,  Ellicott,  Wieseler,  Meyer,  Alford,  Olshausen,  Reuss,  ancj 
Others, 


144  THE  PAULINE  EPISTLES. 

2.  Another  question  of  interest  here  is  whether 
Paul  wrote  a  letter  to  the  Corinthians  that  we  do  not 
now  possess.  In  i  Cor.  5:9  the  Apostle  says,  "  I 
wrote  unto  you  in  an  epistle  not  to  company  with 
fornicators."  But  where  does  he  write  this }  It 
cannot  mean  in  this  First  Epistle,  for  no  such 
command  can  be  found  in  it.  The  most  natural 
understanding  is  that  Paul  did  write  a  letter  to 
Corinth  in  regard  to  the  special  evil  in  their  church. 
This  letter  is  not  preserved  to  us.  It  may  have  been 
a  brief  note  in  which  the  Apostle  enjoined  separation 
from  profligate  people,  and  in  it  he  may  have  an- 
nounced his  purpose  to  visit  them  first  before  he 
should  go  into  Macedonia. 

This  letter  reveals  to  us  more  of  the  character  of 
the  Apostle  than  any  other.  It  may  seem  at  times 
almost  egotistical,  but  Paul  was  not  led  to  write  as 
he  did  by  any  unworthy  motives.  The  circum- 
stances compelled  his  writing  such  a  letter.  He  had 
to  defend  himself  against  malicious  attacks,  and  in 
doing  so  he  gives  us  that  wonderful  catalogue  of  his 
sufferings  and  trials  for  Christ  in  11:23-33.  That 
record  shows  us  how  little  we  do  actually  know  of 
the  Apostle's  stormy  and  heroic  life.  In  this  letter 
we  can  almost  hear  his  heart  beat.  "None  of  his 
other  letters  give  us  so  clear  a  view  of  his  noble,  ten- 
der heart,  the  sufferings  and  joys  of  his  inward  life, 
his  alternations  of  feelings,  his  anxieties  and  strug- 
gles for  the  welfare  of  his  churches.  These  were  his 
daily  and  hourly  care,  as  his  children  whom  he  had 
brought  forth  in  travail ;  and  the  mortification  their 
conduct  had  caused  him,  far  from  cooling  his  affec- 
tion for  them,  only  Inflamed  his  love  and  his    holy 


ROMANS,  145 

zeal  for  their  eternal  salvation."^*  "The  First  Epis- 
tle to  the  Corinthians  shows  us  how  he  applied  the 
principles  of  Christianity  to  daily  life  in  dealing  with 
the  flagrant  aberrations  of  a  most  unsatisfactory 
Church  :  his  Second  Epistle  to  the  Corinthians  opens 
a  window  into  the  very  emotions  of  his  heart,  and  is 
the  agitated  self-defense  of  a  wounded  and  loving 
spirit  to  ungrateful  and  erring,  yet  not  wholly  lost, 
or  wholly  incorruptible  souls."  ^^ 

VI.   THE   EPISTLE   TO   THE   ROMANS. 
/.    Canonicity, 

This  is  one  of  the  best  attested  books  in  the  New 
Testament.  According  to  De  Wette  its  authenticity 
is  raised  above  all  doubt.  The  external  testimony 
begins  with  Clement  of  Rome  (96),  and  includes 
Ignatius  (115),  Polycarp  (116),  The  Testaments  of  the 
Twelve  Patriarchs  (120),  Aristides  (138-161),  Justin 
Martyr  (145),  Marcion  (130),  Muratori  Canon  (170), 
Theophilus  of  Antioch  (168),  Irenaeus  (175),  Ter- 
tullian  (190),  Clement  of  Alexandria  (195).  There 
are  nineteen  witnesses  to  it  before  the  beginning 
of  the  third  century,  including  not  only  orthodox 
writers,  but  also  heretics,  who  use  the  Epistle  as 
authoritative  Scripture,  and  all  the  late  writers 
ascribe  it  to  Paul.  "The  internal  evidence  of  its 
genuineness  has  carried  conviction  to  the  minds  of 
the  most  cautious  and  the  most  skeptical  critics. 
Every  chapter,  in  fact,  bears  the  impress  of  the 
same  mind  from  which  the  Epistles  to  the  churches 

2*SchafE's  History  of  the  Apostolic  Church,  Vol.  I.,  p.  344. 
25  Farrar's  Life  and  Work  of  St.  Paul,  chap.  33. 

10  ..■ 


146  THE  PAULINE  EPISTLES. 

of  Corinth  and  Galatia  undoubtedly  proceeded  ;  and 
even  Baur  and  the  critics  of  his  school  who  make 
every  effort  to  prove  the  last  two  chapters  spurious, 
are  obliged  to  admit  that  the  rest  of  the  Epistle  is 
the  genuine  work  of  St.  Paul."  ^^  Bleek  says,  "  The 
genuineness  of  the  Epistle  to  the  Romans  cannot 
be  disputed  on  any  reasonable  grounds  ;  it  is  con- 
clusively established  both  by  its  internal  character 
and  by  external  witnesses.  It  never  was  suspected 
in  the  early  Church  ;  on  the  contrary,  we  have  the 
earliest  traces  of  its  being  recognized  and  used  as 
a  work  of  the  Apostle  Paul's  in  Clemens  Romanus 
and  Polycarp,  and  even  in  the  Ep;stle  to  the 
Hebrews,  and  perhaps  in  the  First  Epistle  of  St. 
Peter.  "'^ 

Objections  have  been  raised  as  to  the  integrity  of 
the  letter,  and  some  reject  the  last  two  chapters, 
claiming  that  the  benediction  of  i6 :  25-27  really 
belongs  at  the  end  of  the  fourteenth  chapter.  As 
to  the  fifteenth  chapter,  however,  it  can  be  said  with 
confidence  that  "  the  result  of  modern  criticism  has 
been  to  prove  beyond  reasonable  doubt  that  it  is 
both  the  genuine  work  of  Paul,  and  an  original  por- 
tion of  the  Roman  Epistle."  Against  16:3-24  it  has 
been  argued  that  as  Paul  had  never  been  at  Rome, 
he  could  not  possibly  have  known  so  many  of  the 
Roman  Christians.  One  writer  has  propounded  the 
theory  that  this  section  really  was  written  by  Paul, 
but  at  a  later  date,  after  the  first  Roman  imprison- 
ment, which  was  his  earliest  opportunity  of  forming 
so  many   acquaintances  among  them.     This   writer 

26  Gifford  in  Bible  Commentary. 
87|31eek's  Introd.  to  N.  T.,  p.  447. 


ROMANS.  147 

holds  that  this  section  was  afterwards  add^d  to  this 
Epistle.  There  are  twenty-four  persons  named  in 
this  section,  and  Prof.  Gifford  argues  ^^  that  Paul  could 
not  have  known  all  these  at  the  time  of  the  composi- 
tion of  this  Epistle.  When  Paul  left  Ephesus  just 
after  Pentecost  in  57  A.  D.,  Aquila  and  Priscilla  were 
there.  But  in  this  section  the  Church  that  is  in  their 
house  is  saluted.  Can  we  suppose,  it  is  asked,  that 
they  went  away  from  Ephesus  so  soon  after  Paul's 
departure,  and  had  gone  to  Rome  }  But  in  regard  to 
them  it  is  to  be  remembered  that  Rome  was  their 
home,  and  that  having  been  expelled  from  that  city 
by  the  edict  of  the  Emperor  Claudius,  they  would 
doubtless  return  again  as  soon  as  they  could.  Fur- 
thermore it  is  to  be  noted  that  Paul  evidently  names 
all  the  persons  he  knew  who  were  in  Rome.  He  had 
labored  in  commercial  centers  and  among  the  work- 
ing classes,  and  he  could  not  help  meeting  as  many 
as  he  names.  People  were  constantly  traveling  be- 
tween Rome  and  the  provinces,  and  Paul  would  meet 
any  Christians  who  happened  to  come  to  the  cities 
where  he  was  preaching.  Andronicus  and  Junia  he 
calls,  "  my  fellow-prisoners  "  (16  :  7).  In  2  Cor.  1 1  :  23 
he  speaks  of  "prisons  more  frequent."  Who  can  say 
that  they  had  not  been  imprisoned  with  Paul  on  one 
of  these  occasions.?  And  as  to  the  warnings  against 
false  teachers  (16 :  17-20),  they  need  occasion  no  spe- 
cial remark  in  view  of  the  experiences  the  Apostle 
had  already  had  in  Galatia  and  Corinth. 

Doubtless  one  cause  of  the  discussions  over  these 
last  two  chapters  is  found  in  the  fact  that  the  bene- 
diction is  placed  by  some  authorities  at  the  end  of 

«8  Trof.  Gifford  in  the  Bible  Commentary. 


148  THE  PAULINE  EPISTLES, 

the  fourteenth  chapter.  But  all  the  great  MSS  and 
the  Latin  Fathers  place  it  where  it  is  now  found, 
and  with  them  the  great  textual  critics  agree. ^^ 
None  of  the  MSS  omit  the  benedictions  entirely, 
they  only  differ  as  to  the  proper  place  for  them. 
But  despite  these  objections  the  integrity  of  the 
Epistle  as  it  now  stands  is  certain.  The  real  facts 
in  the  case  establish  this  beyond  the  possibility  of 
a  doubt. 

And  in  view  of  what  has  been  said  the  Pauline 
authorship  is  established.  It  claims  to  be  by  Paul, 
and  there  is  not  a  single  argument  that  can  be  suc- 
cessfully urged  against  the  faith  of  the  Church.  It 
is  Pauline  in  language  and  matter,  and  its  historical 
references  harmonize  with  all  known  facts  of  the 
life  of  the  great  Apostle  to  the  Gentiles. 

//.    The  Roman  Church. 

The  origin  of  this  church  cannot  now  be  dis- 
covered. The  Roman  Catholic  Church  claims  that 
Peter  founded  it  in  the  second  year  of  the  Emperor 
Claudius  (42  A.  D.),  and  that  he  presided  over  it  as 
its  bishop  for  twenty-five  years.  This  claim,  how- 
ever, is  negatived  by  several  facts.  In  this  Epistle 
no  reference  is  made  to  Peter.  Surely  if  Peter  had 
been  at  the  head  of  this  church  for  fifteen  years 
when  Paul  wrote  this  Epistle,  he  would  have  at  least 
mentioned  his  name.  And  if  he  had  been  there, 
what  occasion  would  there  have  been  for  Paul  to 
write  to  that  church,  for  it  was  not  his  custom  to 
build  on  another  man's  foundation .?  But  there  is 
not  the  slightest  intimation  in  the  New  Testament 

^^  Tischendorf ,  Tregelles,  Westcott  and  Hort. 


ROMANS.  149 

that  Peter  ever  visited  Rome.  On  the  contrary, 
there  are  many  things  to  indicate  that  he  spent  his 
life  in  Judea  and  the  far  East.  In  44  A.  D.,  he  was 
imprisoned  in  Jerusalem  by  Herod  Agrippa.  In  50 
A.  D.,  he  was  in  the  same  city  when  the  council  was 
called  to  consider  the  questions  sent  in  from  An- 
tioch.  In  64  A.  D.,  he  wrote  his  First  Epistle  from 
Babylon.  Then  in  not  one  of  the  Epistles  that  Paul 
wrote  from  Rome  during  his  first  imprisonment 
there  does  he  in  any  way  refer  to  Peter  as  being  in 
Rome.  All  these  facts  are  in  absolute  conflict  with 
the  tradition  that  Peter  founded  this  church. 

But  the  Gospel  must  have  reached  Rome  at  an 
early  date.  On  the  day  of  Pentecost,  when  the  Holy 
Spirit  descended  on  the  waiting  disciples,  there  were 
present  among  others  in  Jerusalem  "  strangers  of 
Rome."  It  is  not  unreasonable  to  suppose  that  some 
of  them  were  converted  under  the  searching  preach- 
ing of  Peter  on  that  day,  and  that  they  on  their 
return  carried  the  Gospel  to  Rome.  We  know  that 
there  was  a  very  large  Jewish  population  in  Rome, 
and  the  contact  between  Jerusalem  and  Rome  was 
so  constant  that  it  would  be  impossible  for  the  knowl- 
edge of  the  Christian  faith  not  to  reach  Rome. 
"  Whether  this  can  be  accounted  for  by  the  presence 
of  Roman  pilgrims  at  the  first  Christian  Pentecost 
(Acts  2  :  10),  or  by  the  dispersion  that  followed  the 
first  persecution  of  the  Christians  (8  :  i  ;  11  :  19),  is 
quite  a  matter  of  indifference ;  the  ways  that  led 
Roman  Jews  to  Jerusalem  or  to  other  places  where 
there  were  Jewish  Christian  churches,  and  believing 
Jews  to  Rome,  are  too  many  to  permit  of  their  being 
taken  into  special   consideration.     The  idea   that  a 


150  THE  PAULINE  EPISTLES. 

church  of  believers  could  not  originate  without  act- 
ual apostolic  agency  is  quite  unhistorical."  ^** 

Some  of  those  saluted  by  the  Apostle  in  this  letter 
were  Christians  before  he  was  (i6  :  7).  There  are  refer- 
ences to  three  different  places  of  meeting  for  worship 
(16:5,  14,  15),  although  we  cannot  affirm  absolutely 
that  there  was  a  fully  organized  Church  in  the  eter- 
nal city.  The  faith  and  obedience  of  these  Roman 
Christians  were  well  known  (1:8;  16  :  19).  All  these 
things  go  to  show  that  the  Gospel  had  been  doing  its 
divine  work  in  Rome  for  many  years.  It  does  not 
militate  against  this  that  the  Jews  who  waited  on 
Paul  after  his  arrival  in  Rome  in  the  Spring  of  61 
A.  D. ,  professed  or  affected  to  be  ignorant  of  the  Chris- 
tian faith.  So  far  as  the  Jews  were  concerned,  the 
Christians  were  indeed  everywhere  spoken  against. 
Furthermore  the  Jews  of  Rome  were  as  a  rule  active 
business  people,  and  in  their  business  haunts  in  so 
large  a  city  as  Rome,  might  have  had  but  little  con- 
tact with  Christianity.  And  for  this  reason  they 
might  actually  have  had  but  little  beyond  hearsay 
knowledge  of  Christian  truth  and  people.  Men  en- 
grossed in  the  pursuit  of  the  things  of  this  life  do  not 
generally  have  much  personal  acquaintance  with 
religious  matters. 

As  to  the  composition  of  the  Roman  church  we 
cannot  positively  affirm  anything.  There  are  pas- 
sages which  seem  to  point  to  a  Jewish  character  in 
the  church  there.  On  the  other  hand  there  are 
passages  that  all  but  assert  its  Gentile  character 
(1:5,6;  I  :  13  ;  II  :  13  ;  15:15,  16).  It  seems  most 
probable  that  the  predominating  element  in  its 
30  Weiss'  III  trod.,  Vol.  I.,  p.  295, 


ROMANS.  151 

composition  was  Gentile.  Prof.  Jowett  affirms  that 
*'the  Roman  church  appeared  to  be  at  once  Jewish 
and  Gentile  —  Jewish  in  feeling,  Gentile  in  origin." 

///.  Occasio7i  and  Design  of  the  Epistle. 

Before  leaving  Ephesus,  and  while  contemplating 
a  trip  through  Macedonia  and  Achaia  and  from 
thence  to  Jerusalem,  Paul  said,  ''After  I  have  been 
there,  I  must  also  see  Rome."  In  this  Epistle  he 
writes,  ''  I  would  not  have  you  ignorant,  brethren, 
that  oftentimes  I  purposed  to  come  unto  you  (i  :  13), 
having  a  great  desire  these  many  years  to  come 
unto  you"  (15:23).  No  more  important  point  for 
the  spread  of  the  Gospel  could  be  occupied  than  it 
was,  and  the  Apostle  recognized  that  fact.  It  was 
natural  then  that  he  should  desire  to  go  to  that 
city,  and  that  he  should  attempt  meanwhile  to 
mould  the  beliefs  of  the  Christians  there.  But  the 
way  had  not  yet  been  opened  up  for  him  to  go  there 
in  person.  And  when  he  heard  that  Phoebe,  a  dea- 
coness of  the  church  of  Cenchrea  the  Southern 
seaport  of  Corinth,  was  about  to  go  to  Rome,  he 
determined  to  do  the  next  best  thing  and  send  a 
letter  to  them  by  her  hand.  It  was  a  most  favorable 
opportunity  for  him  to  communicate  with  them. 
The  occasion  of  the  letter  consequently  was  the 
proposed  visit  of  Phoebe  to  Rome,  together  with  his 
own  long-seated  desire  to  visit  that  city  himself. 

It  is  by  no  means  as  easy  to  determine  exactly 
the  object  Paul  had  in  view  in  writing  this  Epistle. 
Upon  this  point  there  is  a  great  diversity  of  opinion 
among  scholars.  No  heresy  is  combated  in  the 
Epistle,  and  as  yet  there  were  no  disorders  in  the 


152  THE  PAULINE  EPISTLES. 

Roman  church  to  reform.  The  intention  of  the 
Apostle  to  visit  Rome  as  soon  as  possible  after  his 
prospective  journey  to  Jerusalem  may  have  led  him 
to  consider  it  advisable  to  prepare  the  Christians  of 
that  city  for  his  visit  by  means  of  a  letter.  But 
this  could  not  have  been  the  main  purpose  he  had. 
Dr.  Gloag  writes :  '*  The  object  of  the  letter  was 
general,  not  special.  Paul  had  no  special  errors  to 
correct,  no  disorders  to  reform.  The  Roman  church 
was  not  connected  with  him,  as  other  churches,  by 
direct  personal  visitation.  The  design  of  the  Ejhs- 
tle  was  to  impart  to  the  Roman  Christians  a  correct 
view  of  Christianity.  This  with  several  minute 
variations,  is  the  opinion  adopted  by  De  Wette, 
Olshausen,  Tholuck,  and  Alford."  ''  The  Epistle  to 
the  Romans,"  observes  De  Wette,  "  is  the  only 
Epistle  of  the  Apostle  wherein  he  designedly  rep- 
resents his  doctrine  in  its  full  connection,  whilst 
in  his  other  Epistles  he  takes  cognizance  of  peculiar 
wants,  doubts,  and  errors,  and  presupposes  the 
knowledge  of  his  doctrine."  The  theme  or  subject- 
matter  of  the  Epistle  is  supposed  to  be  expressed  at 
its  commencement ;  and  the  whole  Epistle  is  a  proof 
or  development  of  that  theme,  namely,  that  *  the 
Gospel  of  Christ  is  the  power  of  God  unto  salvation 
to  every  one  that  believeth  ;  to  the  Jew  first,  and 
also  to  the  Gentile'"  (Rom.  i  :  i6).  Professor  Beet 
affirms  that  Paul's  purpose  in  this  letter  is  "to  as- 
sert, and  logically  develop,  the  new  doctrines  ;  to 
show  that  they  harmonize  with  God's  declarations 
and  conduct  as  recorded  in  the  Old  Testament ; 
and  to  apply  them  to  matters  of  secular  and  Church 
life," 


ROMANS.  153 

IV,   The  Outline  of  the  Epistle, 

The  following  is  a  brief  outline  given  by  Prof. 
Warfield  :  — 

I.  Introduction  (i  :i-i7)  in  which  the  theme  of 
the  Epistle  is  brought  forth  as  Salvation  by  a  God- 
provided  righteousness  attainable  by  all  who  believe. 

II.  Doctrinal  development  and  defense  of  this 
theme,     i  :  18-11  :  36. 

1.  The  absolute  necessity  of  such  a  method  of 

justification  ;  true  of 
{a)  the  Gentiles  (i  :  18-32),  and 
{J})  the  Jews  (2  :  1-3  :  20). 

2.  The   positive    exposition    and   proof  of  this 

method  of  justification.  3:21-5:21. 
ia)  Exposition  of  its  nature.  3  :  21-31. 
(^)  Proof  of  the  doctrine.     4:1-5:21. 

3.  Blessed  moral  effects  of  this  method  of  justi- 

fication.    6  :  1-8  :  39. 

{a)  In  its  relation  to  sin.  6  :  1-23. 

(J))  In  its  relation  to  law.  7  : 1-13. 
ic)  In  its  relation  to  sinful  habit.     7  :  14-25. 

{d)  In  its  relation  to  the  Christian's  security. 

8  :  1-39. 

4.  External  effects  of   the  application   of   this 

method  of  justification.  9  :  i-ii  :  36. 
[a)  Expression  of  grief  at  the  Jews'  rejection, 

9  •  1-5, 

(V)  which  rejection  is  not  inconsistent  with 
God's  character  and  promises,  9  : 6- 
24,  for 

{c)  the  whole  case  was  foretold  by  prophecy, 
9:25-29.     Hence  he  gives 


154  THE  PAULINE  EPISTLES. 

{d)  a  clear  statement  of  the  effects  of  this  re- 
jection, 9  :  30-10:  21,  and 
{e)  defends  this  rejection.     11  :i-36. 

III.  Exhortations  based  on  the  foregoing  doc- 
trine.    12  :  1-15  :  13. 

IV.  Conclusion.     15  :  14-16  :  27. 

V.  Date  and  Place  of  Composition. 

From  what  has  been  written,  it  is  evident  that 
the  letter  was  written  at  Corinth.  During  his 
former  visit  to  Corinth  the  Apostle  abode  with 
Aquila  and  Priscilla,  working  for  his  own  support 
(Acts  18  :  3).  During  this  second  visit  he  was  the 
guest  of  Gaius  (Rom.  16  :  23),  one  of  his  Corinthian 
converts  (i  Cor.  i  :  14).  When  he  wrote  this  Epistle, 
he  had  in  his  keeping  the  offering  for  the  poor 
saints  at  Jerusalem  which  had  been  made  by 
the  Macedonian  and  Corinthian  churches  (Rom.  15  : 
26,  27).  It  is  evident  then  that  this  Epistle  was 
written  after  First  Corinthians  ;  for  in  that  Epistle 
he  gave  directions  in  regard  to  this  same  collection, 
which  so  far  as  the  Corinthians  were  concerned,  was 
not  then  completed  (i  Cor.  16:  i,  2).  He  had  now 
reached  Corinth,  had  received  this  offering,  and  was 
on  the  eve  of  his  departure  to  Jerusalem  with  it. 
This  letter  was  written  then  during  the  three  Win- 
ter months  of  57-58  A.  D.  It  had  been  the  Apostle's 
plan  to  take  shipping  at  Corinth  for  the  East,  but  the 
discovery  of  a  plot  against  his  life  led  him  to  take 
the  overland  route  to  Philippi  (Acts  20:3),  where 
he  spent  the  Passover  (Acts  20 : 6),  which  occurred 
that  year  on  March  27,  A.  D.  And  as  this  Epistle 
was  apparently  written    just   before   his   departure 


ROMANS.  155 

from  Corinth,  it  is  doubtless  correct  to  date  it  dur- 
ing February  of  58  A.  D.  Phoebe,  the  deaconess  of 
the  church  of  Cenchrea,  was  the  bearer  of  this 
Epistle,  as  she  was  on  the  point  of  going  to  Rome 
to  attend  to  some  private  business  (Rom.  16  :  i,  2), 
and  her  journey  thither,  as  we  have  seen,  was  in  part 
the  occasion  of  the  Apostle's  writing.  Tertius,  of 
whom  we  know  nothing,  was  Paul's  amanuensis  on 
this  occasion  (Rom.  16  :  22). 

VL  Peculiarities  of  the  Epistle. 

The  more  formal  dogmatic  character  of  this 
Epistle  distinguishes  it  from  all  the  other  Pauline 
Epistles.  Bishop  Wordsworth  says  that  ''  the  great 
character  of  the  Epistle  is  its  universality."  Dr. 
Gifford  writes  that  here  Paul  sets  forth  ''  a  full  and 
systematic  statement  of  those  fundamental  principles 
of  the  Gospel,  which  render  it  the  one  true  religion 
for  all  the  nations  of  the  earth,  and  meet  especially 
those  deepest  wants  of  human  nature,  which  Judaism 
could  not  satisfy, —  righteousness  in  the  sight  of  God 
and  deliverance  from  the  power  of  sin  and  death." 

This  Epistle  is  the  masterpiece  of  the  great  Apos- 
tle, in  which  he  elaborates  the  doctrines  of  Salvation, 
and  sets  forth  in  clearest  light  the  means  of  man's 
justification  in  the  sight  of  God.  It  is  soteriological 
rather  than  christological.  But  it  is  no  mere  dry  and 
formal  statement  of  doctrine.  In  its  eighth  chapter 
we  meet  one  of  the  grandest  portions  in  all  the 
range  of  literature.  Of  the  whole  letter  Martin 
Luther  wrote,  "  This  Epistle  is  the  true  masterpiece 
of  the  New  Testament,  and  the  very  purest  Gospel, 
which  is  well  worthy  and  deserving  that  a  Christian 


156  THE  PAULINE  EPISTLES. 

man  should  not  only  learn  it  by  heart,  word  for  word, 
but  also  that  he  should  daily  deal  with  it  as  with  the 
daily  bread  of  men's  souls.  For  it  never  can  be  too 
much  or  too  well  read  or  studied  ;  and  the  more  it  is 
handled,  the  more  precious  it  becomes,  and  the  bet- 
ter it  tastes." 

2»   ^be  jepfstles  of  tbe  Captivity, 

We  now  come  to  that  group  of  the  Pauline  Epis- 
tles known  as  the  Epistles  of  the  Captivity.  Of 
these  there  are  four,  Colossians,  Philemon,  Ephe- 
sians,  and  Philippians.  They  were  written  during 
the  two  years  of  Paul's  first  Roman  imprisonment 
mentioned  in  Acts  28  :  30.  A  period  of  over  four 
years  intervenes  between  the  composition  of  the 
Epistle  to  the  Romans  and  these.  It  is  impossible 
to  tell  definitely  their  order  in  time  of  composition, 
except  that  Philippians,  as  we  will  notice  hereafter, 
was  probably  written  last.  The  Epistles  to  the 
Colossians  and  to  the  Ephesians  were  dispatched 
at  the  same  time  by  the  hand  of  Tychicus,  and  he 
was  accompanied  on  the  same  trip  by  Onesimus  who 
had  in  his  keeping  the  Epistle  to  Philemon.  Paul 
was  dwelling  in  his  own  hired  house  in  the  region 
of  the  Praetorium,  bound  night  and  day  to  a  Roman 
soldier.  Freedom  of  access  to  the  Apostle  seems, 
however,  to  have  been  granted  to  all  who  desired 
to  see  him.  That  house  was  therefore  a  perfect 
hive  of  Christian  activity,  from  which  and  to  which 
the  workers  were  continually  going  and  coming,  on 
their  errands  to  and  from  those  churches  which 
were  Paul's   daily  care    (2  Cor.  11  128).     Perplexed 


COLOSSIANS.  157 

elders  came  there  to  consult  the  great  Apostle  con- 
cerning the  affairs  of  their  various  churches.  Thus 
though  a  prisoner  and  closely  confined,  the  Apostle 
was  in  constant  touch  with  scores  of  churches  by 
means  of  the  consecrated  workers  who  came  to  seek 
his  advice,  or  went  forth  in  accordance  with  his 
directions.  And  from  his  house  proceeded  streams 
of  influence  that  touched  countless  numbers  of  lives. 
Though  he  was  in  bonds,  the  word  of  God  was  not 
bound.  We  will  now  proceed  to  the  study  of  these 
four  letters,  written  from  that  "  hired  house "  in 
Rome. 

VII.    THE   EPISTLE   TO   THE   COLOSSIANS. 

/.    Caiionicity. 

When  the  early  Christian  writings  are  examined, 
we  do  not  find  in  them  any  sure  quotations  of  this 
Epistle  until  we  come  to  Aristides  (138-161)  and 
Justin  Martyr  (145).  There  are,  however,  manifest 
echoes  of  it  in  Clement  of  Rome  (96),  Barnabas 
(106),  and  Ignatius  (115).  Marcion  (130)  places  it 
in  his  list,  and  it  is  to  be  found  in  the  Muratori 
Canon  (170),  as  well  as  in  the  Old  Latin  (160)  and 
Syriac  (i/o)  Versions.  It  is  quoted  by  name  by 
Irenaeus  (i/S),  Tertullian  (190),  and  Clement  of 
Alexandria  (195).  From  this  it  is  evident  that  the 
external  evidence  in  support  of  it  is  incontrovertible. 
And  the  hiternal  evidence  is  by  no  means  defective. 
It  claims  to  be  by  Paul  (1:1;  4 :  18).  And  this 
claim  is  borne  out  by  the  whole  Epistle,  its  historical 
allusions  and  literary  character.  ''The  character 
of  Paul  is  discernible  in  the  writer ;  his  anxiety  for 
the  spiritual  welfare  of  the  Colossians     (  i  :  9;  2  :  5  )  ; 


158  THE  PAULINE  EPISTLES. 

his  gratitude  to  God  for  the  good  report  which  he 
had  received  of  their  faith  and  love  (1:4);  his  ear- 
nest desire  for  their  spiritual  improvement  and 
increased  holiness  (i  :  9,  10)  ;  his  liberality  and  free- 
dom from  carnal  ordinances  (2  :  16) ;  and  his  solici- 
tude for  an  interest  in  their  prayers  (4 :  3).  The 
style,  also,  with  some  variations,  accounted  for  by 
the  nature  of  the  subject,  is  decidedly  Pauline."  ^^ 

Of  course  there  have  been  found  those  who  assail 
this  Epistle,  affirming  that  it  is  un-Pauline  in  lan- 
guage, style,  and  matter ;  and  that  it  combats  a 
species  of  heresy  that  did  not  arise  until  after  Paul's 
day.  But  Bishop  Ellicott  says  that  *'  no  doubts 
have  been  urged  that  deserve  any  serious  consid- 
eration." ^^  It  was  not  until  1838  that  this  Epistle 
was  called  in  question  by  any  one.  But  Meyer  af- 
firms that  **  the  fabrication  of  such  an  Epistle  would 
be  more  marvelous  than  its  originality."^^  And 
Renan,  who  assuredly  cannot  be  accused  of  par- 
tiality to  the  Scriptures,  writes,  "  This  Epistle  is  to 
be  received  unhesitatingly  as  the  work  of  St.  Paul." 
Considering  all  the  evidence  obtainable,  we  cannot 
but  feel  that  its  authenticity  and  genuineness  are 
conclusively  proved. 

//.   The  Church  at  Colossce. 

Colossse,  more  popularly  known  in  Paul's  day  as 
Colassse,  had  been  a  city  of  considerable  size  and 
importance,  according  to  the  testimony  of  Herodotus 
and   Xenophon.     Its   neighboring    cities,  Hierapolis 

81  Gloag's  Introd.  to  the  Pauline  Epistles,  p.  265. 

82  Com.  on  Col.,  Introd. 

83  Com.  on  Col.,  p.  247. 


COLOSSIANS.  159 

and  Laodicea,  however,  had  outstripped  it  in  the 
race  for  supremacy,  and  in  apostolic  times  it  had 
lost  much  of  its  former  glory  and  prestige.  It  was 
situated  in  the  province  of  Phrygia  in  the  Lycus 
valley,  on  the  river  bearing  that  name  which  pours 
into  the  Mceander.  To-day  its  exact  cite  is  largely 
a  matter  of  conjecture.  Lightfoot  tells  us  that  "  not 
a  single  event  in  Christian  history  is  connected  with 
its  name ;  and  its  very  existence  is  only  rescued 
from  oblivion,  when  at  long  intervals  some  bishop 
of  Colossae  attaches  his  signature  to  the  decree  of 
an  ecclesiastical  synod."  ^*  Earthquakes,  to  which 
the  whole  region  is  subject,  together  with  the  cal- 
careous deposits  of  the  river,  have  helped  to  obliter- 
ate the  ruins  of  that  once  important  city.  The 
church  at  Colossae  was  doubtless  the  least  in  im- 
portance of  all  the  churches  to  which  the  Apostle 
addressed  an  Epistle. 

The  church  at  this  place  was  not  established  by 
Paul,  as  is  manifest  from  his  words,  **  For  I  would 
that  ye  knew  what  great  conflict  I  have  for  you, 
and  for  them  at  Laodicea,  and  for  as  many  as  have 
not  seen  my  face  in  the  flesh."  On  his  second  and 
third  missionary  journeys  the  Apostle  passed  some- 
what to  the  North  of  Colossae  and  Laodicea,  and  up 
to  the  time  of  the  writing  of  this  Epistle  he  had  not 
visited  that  region.  While  Paul  labored  in  Ephesus 
(54-57  A.  D.),  he  had  been  so  successful  that  his 
great  Ephesian  enemy,  Demetrius  the  silversmith, 
had  said  to  his  fellow-workmen  of  Ephesus,  "that 
not  alone  at  Ephesus,  but  almost  throughout  all 
Asia,  this  Paul  hath  persuaded  and  turned  away 
3*  Lightfoot  on  CoL,  p  70. 


160  THE  PAULINE  EPISTLES. 

much  people,  saying  that  they  be  *  no  gods, 
which  are  made  with  hands,"  etc.  (Acts  19:26). 
This  Epistle  speaks  of  Epaphras  in  such  a  way  as 
to  imply  that  he  had  founded  the  Colossian  church 
(i  :  7).  In  all  probability  this  man  had  come  under 
the  influence  of  Paul's  preaching  at  Ephesus,  for  the 
Acts  tells  us  (19  :  10)  "  that  all  they  which  were  in 
Asia  heard  the  word  of  the  Lord  Jesus."  Epaphras 
was  a  Colossian  (4  :  12),  and  it  was  to  him  that  the 
Colossians  owed  their  knowledge  of  the  truth  as  it 
is  in  Christ  (i  :  7).  But  this  man  Epaphras  did  not 
limit  his  labors  for  Christ  to  his  own  city  Colossae, 
for  he  apparently  was  also  the  founder  of  the 
churches  of  Hierapolis  and  Laodicea  (4:13).  His 
was  the  consuming  zeal  of  those  early  disciples, 
who  in  their  intense  devotion  for  Christ,  did  not 
stop  to  count  the  cost  of  His  service.  In  the  Epistle 
to  Philemon,  Epaphras  is  called  by  Paul  "  my  fellow- 
prisoner  in  Christ"  (Philemon  23).  Probably  his 
relations  with  Paul  had  caused  suspicions  against 
him,  and  this  may  have  led  to  his  detention  for  a 
time  at  least  as  a  prisoner  with  Paul  at  Rome. 

Philemon,  to  whom  Paul  addressed  one  of  his 
letters,  was  also  a  Colossian.  He  was  a  man  of  con- 
siderable means,  and  he  with  his  wife  provided  in 
their  commodious  house  a  meeting  place  for  the 
Colossian  church.  Their  son  Archippus,  to  whom 
in  this  Epistle  an  exhortation  to  renewed  faithful- 
ness is  addressed  (4 :  17),  was  probably  the  resident 
minister  of  the  Colossian  church,  although  some 
believe  that  his  ministry  was  exercised  at  Laodicea, 
because  of  the  fact  that  the  charge  to  him  follows 


C0L0SS2ANS.  161 

the  injunction  in  regard  to  their  having  this  Epistle 
read  to  the  church  of  that  city  (4  :  16,  17). 

The  Colossian  church  was  mainly  Gentile  in  its 
composition  (i  :  21,  27  ;  2:11),  although  the  danger- 
ous heresy  threatening  them  was  of  Jewish  origin. 
There  were  unquestionably  some  Jewish  members 
in  it,  but  in  the  main  they  were  Gentiles.  The 
heresy  that  was  securing  a  hold  among  them  was 
"(i)  a  combination  of  angel-worship  and  asceticism  ; 
(2)  a  self-styled  philosophy  or  gnosis  which  depre- 
ciated Christ ;  (3)  a  rigid  observance  of  Jewish 
festivals  and  sabbaths.  The  most  probable  view, 
therefore,  seems  to  be  that  some  Alexandrian  Jews 
had  appeared  at  Colossas,  professing  a  belief  in 
Christianity,  and  imbued  with  the  Greek  "philoso- 
phy" of  the  school  of  Philo,  but  combining  with  it 
the  Rabbinical  theosophy  and  angelology  which 
afterwards  was  embodied  in  the  Kabbala,  and  an 
extravagant  asceticism,  which  afterwards  distin- 
guished   several    sects   of  the    Gnostics.  "^° 

///.   The  Occasion  and  Object  of  the  Epistle. 

The  occasion  of  this  Epistle  is  unquestionably  to 
be  found  in  the  visit  of  Epaphras  to  Paul.  This 
zealous  Christian  seems  to  have  made  the  journey 
to  Rome  for  the  special  purpose  of  securing  the 
advice  of  the  great  Apostle.  It  was  from  him  that 
Paul  learned  all  about  the  condition  of  the  Colossian 
church,  from  him  he  heard  of  their  faith  in  Christ 
Jesus  and  love  to  all  the  saints  (Col.  1:4).  This 
faithful  worker  informed  the  Apostle  of  all  the  com- 

35Conybeare  &  Howson's  Life  of  Paul,  Vol.  II.,  p.  383. 


1 62  THE  PA  ULINE  EPISTLES, 

mendable  features  of  the  Colossian  church.  But 
while  there  was  not  a  little  in  the  report  to  please 
Paul,  there  were  other  things  sufficiently  grave  to 
cause  him  great  concern.  An  insidious  and  dan- 
gerous heresy  was  beginning  to  threaten  the  very 
existence  of  the  church  there.  The  leaders  of  this 
heresy  were  evidently  Jewish  Christians,  the  influ- 
ence of  whose  teachings  was  on  the  increase.  It  is 
noticeable  that  these  heretics  were  not  like  the 
Judaizing  teachers  with  whom  Paul  had  had  to  deal 
in  other  places.  Here  they  made  no  assault  on  the 
Apostle's  authority,  but  contented  themselves  with 
heretical  teachings  as  described  above. 

The  object  of  the  Epistle,  according  to  Bishop 
Ellicott,  was  "an  earnest  desire  on  the  part  of  the 
Apostle  to  warn  the  Colossians  against  a  system  of 
false  teaching,  partly  oriental  and  theosophistic  in 
its  character  (2  :  18),  and  partly  Judaical  and  cere- 
monial (2  :  16),  which  was  tending  on  the  one  hand 
to  obscure  the  majesty  and  glory  of  Christ  (1:15; 
2  :8),  and,  on  the  other  hand,  to  introduce  ritualistic 
observances,  especially  on  the  side  of  bodily  austeri- 
ties (2  :  16-23),  opposed  alike  to  the  simplicity  and 
freedom  of  the  Gospel,  and  to  all  true  and  vital 
union  with  the  risen  Lord  (2:19;  3  :  i)."  The  main 
design  of  the  Epistle  consequently  was  to  refute 
these  heretical  ideas,  and  to  warn  the  Colossian 
Christians  against  them.  The  supreme  glory  of 
Christ  is  the  principal  theme  of  this  Christological 
Epistle. 

The  bearer  of  the  Epistle  was  Tychicus,  whom 
he  describes  as  "  a  beloved  brother,  and  a  faithful 
minister  and  fellow-servant  in  the  Lord ;  whom  I 


COLOSSIANS.  1^3 

have  sent  unto  you  for  the  same  purpose  [that  of 
declaring  Paul's  condition],  that  he  might  know 
your  estate  and  comfort  your  hearts  "  (4  :  7,  8).  Ac- 
companying him  was  Onesimus.  Between  them 
they  were  to  tell  the  Colossians  "  all  things  which 
are  done  here." 

IV.  Outline  of  the  Epistle. 

I.  Introduction,     i  :  1-13. 

1.  Salutation,     i  :  i,  2. 

2.  Thanksgiving,     i  :  3-8. 

3.  Prayer,     i  :  9-12.    Transition  to  main  theme. 

i:  13. 
Ii.   Doctrinal  portion  on  the  Person  and  Work  of 
Christ.     I  :  13-2  :  3. 

1.  Redemption    through  the  Son  of  God.      i  : 

13,  14. 

2.  The  dignity  of  His  Person,     i  :  15-19. 
(^.)  The  head  of  all  creation,     i  :  15-17. 

(<^.)  The  head  of  the  church,     i  :  18,  hence 
(<:.)    His  pre-eminence,     i  ;  19. 

3.  His  Work,     i  :  20-2  :  3. 

{a})  General  description  of  it  as  a  work  of 
reconciliation,     i  :  20. 

(^.)  Its  relation  to  the  Colossians.     i  :  21-23. 

(^.)  The  Apostle's  part  in  this  work,  i  124- 

27,  including  his  anxiety  for  all  men, 

I  :  28,  29j   but  especially  for  those  to 

whom  he  is  writing.     2  :  1-3. 

III.  Polemical    Portion,    consisting   of    warnings. 

2:4-23. 

I.  Not  to  permit  any  one  to  deceive  them,  but 
to  cleave  to  Christ,  walking  in  Him.   2  :  4-7, 


IQ^  THE  PAULINE  EPISTLES. 

2.  "  Let  not   worldly   wisdom  lead  you   away 

from  Him,  who  is  the  Head  of  all,  who 
has  quickened  you,  and  forgiven  you,  and 
triumphed  over  all   the   powers  of  evil." 

2  :8-i5. 

3.  "Let  no  man  judge  you  in   ceremonial  ob- 

servances, holding  not  the  Head.  Sub- 
mit not  to  outward  austerities  that  are 
inwardly  vain  and  carnal."     2  :  16-23. 

IV.  Hortatory  Portion,  consisting  of  exhortations 
and  injunctions.     3  :  1-4  :  6. 

1.  To  show  their  union  with  the  risen  Christ. 

3  •  1-4. 

2.  To  put  off  the  old  nature.     3  :  5-1 1. 

3.  To  practice  Christian  graces.     3  :  12-17. 

4.  Special  injunctions.     3:18-4:6,   concerning 
{a.^  Wives  and  husbands.     3  :  18,  19. 

{b,^  Children  and  parents.     3  :  20,  21. 
(c.)   Slaves  and  masters.     3  :  22-4  :  i. 
{d.^  Prayer  and  thanksgiving.     4  :  2-4. 
(e.)  Conduct  and  speech.     4:5,6. 

V.  Personal  messages.     4  :  7-18. 

1.  Commendation  of  Tychicus  and  Onesimus. 

4  :  7-9. 

2.  Salutations.     4:10-15. 

3.  Messages  relating  to  the  Laodicean  church 

and  to  Archippus.     4  :  16,  17. 

4.  Farewell  salutation  in  Paul's  own  handwrit- 

ing.    4 :  18. 

F.  Date  and  Place  of  Composition. 

There  is  almost  unanimous  agreement  among 
scholars  that  Colossians,  Ephesians,  and  Philemon 
were  written  at  the  same  time,  that  Tychicus  carried 


COLOSSIANS.  165 

the  first  two  to  their  respective  destinations  on  the 
same  trip,  and  that  he  was  accompanied  by  the  con- 
verted slave  Onesimus,  who  bore  the  letter  to  Phile- 
mon. But  there  is  some  difference  of  opinion  among 
critics  as  to  whether  they  were  written  during  the 
Csesarean  (58-60  A.  D.),  or  during  the  Roman  im- 
prisonment (61-63  ^-  I)-)-  Meyer  and  others  have 
strenuously  contended  that  they  were  written  at 
Caesarea.  If  they  are  correct,  then  these  Epistles 
were  written  between  Pentecost  58  A.  D.  and  the 
early  Autumn  of  60  A.  D.  But  the  large  majority 
of  critics  assign  them  to  the  Roman  imprisonment 
between  the  Spring  of  61  A.  D.  and  the  Summer  of 
63  A.  D.  Without  entering  fully  into  the  discussion 
of  this  question,  which  is  really  not  one  of  vital  im- 
portance, it  may  be  well  to  note  some  arguments 
to  be  advanced  in  support  of  their  composition  at 
Rome. 

(i.)  Colossians  and  Ephesians  were  written  at 
the  same  time  as  the  Epistle  to  Philemon,  and  the 
bearers  of  these  letters  went  together  to  Colossse 
(Col.  4  :  7-9  ;  Eph.  6  ;  21,  22,  Philemon  10-21).  Now 
it  is  far  more  likely  that  Onesimus,  when  he  ran 
away  from  his  master  Philemon,  would  go  to  Rome 
than  to  Csesarea.  Rome  was  the  great  hiding  place 
for  fugitive  slaves.  How  unlikely  that  he  would  go 
to  a  small  city  such  as  Cassarea  !  How  much  more 
probable  that  he  would  hasten  to  the  eternal  city, 
with  all  of  its  attractions  for  men  of  his  stamp ! 

(2.)  They  were  not  written  at  Caesarea,  because 
Paul  does  not  seem  to  have  labored  there  as  he  could 
and  did  at  Rome  (Acts  28  :  31  ;  Col.  4 :  3,  4),  and  also 
"because  he  could  not  have  expected  at  Csesarea  to 
be  coming  to  Phrygia  (Acts  23  :  11  ;    19:21  ;  Rom. 


IQQ  THE  PAULINE  EPISTLES. 

1 :  13  ;  Acts  20:  25),  whereas  while  writing  to  Phile- 
mon he  expected  soon  to  visit  Phrygia  (Philemon 
22)."  ^^  At  Rome,  while  he  was  a  prisoner,  Paul  dwelt 
in  his  own  hired  house,  receiving  "all  that  came  in 
unto  him,  preaching  the  kingdom  of  God,  and  teach- 
ing those  things  which  concern  the  Lord  Jesus 
Christ,  with  all  confidence,  no  man  forbidding  him." 
But  at  Caesarea  he  was  in  prison,  and  his  every 
movement  was  watched  by  the  Jews,  who  would  not 
permit  such  free  preaching. 

(3.)  The  companions  of  Paul  that  are  mentioned 
in  these  Epistles  fit  Rome  better  than  Csesarea.  We 
have  no  evidence  that  Aristarchus  was  in  prison  at 
Csesarea  with  Paul  (Col.  4 :  10),  but  both  he  and 
Luke  went  to  Rome  with  the  Apostle  (Acts  27  :  2). 

In  view  of  these  facts  with  the  majority  of 
scholars  we  assign  all  of  these  Epistles  to  the 
Roman  captivity.  Their  relative  order  is  unimpor- 
tant. They  were  all  written  at  the  same  time,  ex- 
cept that  to  the  Philippians,  which  came  a  little  later, 
as  we  shall  see  when  that  Epistle  is  considered  in 
its  order.  To  fix  the  date  of  one  of  the  three  is  to 
fix  the  date  of  all.  The  abrupt  ending  of  the  book 
of  Acts  seems  to  imply  that  at  the  end  of  the  two 
years  mentioned,  there  was  a  change  in  Paul's  af- 
fairs. This  change  is  believed  to  have  resulted  in 
his  release.  It  v/as  in  the  Spring  of  61  A.  D.  that 
Paul  arrived  at  Rome  from  the  island  of  Malta, 
where  he  had  been  shipwrecked  the  preceding 
Winter.  He  was  probably  released  in  the  Summer 
of  63  A.  D.  In  accordance  with  this  I  would  date 
these  three  Epistles  (Colossians,  Philemon,  and  Ephe- 

36Conybeare  and  Howson's  St.  Paul,  Vol.  IL,  p.  384,  foot-note. 


PHILEMON,  167 

sians)  in  the  latter  part  of  62  A.  D.,  or. possibly  early 
in  63  A.  D. 

VL  Peculiarities  of  the  Epistles. 

The  peculiar  similarity  between  this  Epistle  and 
that  to  the  Ephesians  will  be  considered  in  connec- 
tion with  the  latter.  One  thing  to  be  especially 
noticed  in  this  Epistle  is  its  special  christological 
character.  It  deals  specifically  with  the  person  and 
work  of  Christ.  It  has  a  large  number  of  once-used 
(hapax  legomena)  words.  The  peculiar  object  of  the 
letter  occasions  this,  many  of  them  being  called  into 
use  in  combating  the  Colossian  heresy.  The  pas- 
sage in  which  the  pre-eminence  of  Christ  (i  :  15-19) 
is  set  forth  is  worthy  of  the  closest  study. 

VIII.  THE  EPISTLE  TO  PHILEMON. 
/.   Canonicity. 

When  the  brevity  and  character  of  this  incompa- 
rable Epistle  is  considered,  it  need  not  be  surprising 
that  we  find  very  few  citations  from,  or  references  to, 
it  in  the  early  Christian  writings.  As  a  short  per- 
sonal letter  with  no  distinctive  doctrinal  passages, 
it  furnished  very  little  matter  for  quotations.  But 
even  though  this  is  true,  yet  external  testimony  to 
it  is  not  lacking.  There  is  possibly  a  reference  to  it 
in  Ignatius  (115),  but  this  is  uncertain.  It  was  con- 
tained in  Marcion's  Catalogue  (130),  as  well  as  in  the 
Muratori  Canon  (170).  It  is  found  also  in  the  Syriac 
(160)  and  Old  Latin  (170)  Versions.  Tertullian  (190) 
specifically  speaks  of  it  as  having  escaped  the  falsify- 
ing hand  of  Marcion,  who  received  it,  but  rejected 


1(58  THE  PAULINE  EPISTLES.' 

the  Pastoral  Epistles.  This  testimony,  according  to 
DeWette,  establishes  its  genuineness  beyond  doubt. 
As  to  the  internal  evidence,  the  following  words 
of  Professor  Hackett  are  worthy  of  note,  namely, 
*'  Nor  does  the  Epistle  itself  offer  anything  to  con- 
flict with  this  decision  (of  the  external  evidence). 
It  is  impossible  to  conceive  of  a  composition  more 
strongly  marked  within  the  same  limits  by  those 
unstudied  assonances  of  thought,  sentiment,  and 
expression,  v/hich  indicate  an  author's  hand,  than 
this  short  Epistle  as  compared  with  Paul's  other 
productions.  Paley  has  a  paragraph  in  his  Horse 
Paulinae  which  illustrates  this  feature  in  a  very  just 
and  forcible  manner.  It  will  be  found  also  that  all 
the  historical  allusions  which  the  Apostle  makes  to 
events  in  his  own  life,  or  to  other  persons  with 
whom  he  was  connected,  harmonize  perfectly  with 
the  statements  or  incidental  intimations  contained 
in  the  Acts  of  the  Apostles,  or  the  other  Epistles  of 
PauL"^^ 

X  Very  vigorous  attacks  have  been  made  upon  this 
inimitable  Epistle  by  an  arrogant  hypercriticism, 
but  all  of  these  attacks  have  always  been  met  suc- 
cessfully. Reuss  writes,  "  The  fact  that  criticism 
has  presumed  to  call  in  question  the  genuineness  of 
these  harmless  lines  only  shows  that  itself  is  not  the 
genuine  thing."  ^*  Indeed  rationalistic  criticism  has 
nowhere  shown  more  conclusively  its  own  unscien- 
tific and  unreasonable  character  than  in  its  treat- 
ment of  this  Epistle.  And  even  Baur,  one  of  its 
assailants,  is  compelled  to  acknowledge  "  that  mod- 

^' Article  in  Smith's  Dictionary  of  the  Bible. 

^^  Reuss'  History  of  the  New  Testament,  Vol.  I.,  p.  n8. 


PHILEMON.  169 

ern  criticism,  in  assailing  this  particular  book,  runs 
a  greater  risk  of  exposing  itself  to  the  imputation 
of  an  excessive  distrust,  a  morbid  sensibility  to 
doubt  and  denial,  than  in  questioning  the  claims  of 
any  other  Epistle  ascribed  to  Paul." 

//.    The  Person  Addressed, 

The  person  addressed  is  Philemon,  a  Colossian 
Christian.  Salutations  are  likewise  addressed  to  Ap- 
phia  and  Archippus,  who  in  all  probability  were  re- 
spectively the  wife  and  son  of  Philemon,  as  well  as  to 
the  church  that  gathered  in  their  house  for  worship. 
Onesimus,  the  bearer  of  the  letter  and  to  whom  it 
refers,  was  also  a  Colossian  (Col.  4 : 9),  and  the 
former  slave  of  Philemon.  An  effort  has  been  made 
to  prove  that  Laodicea,  and  not  Colossse,  was  the 
home  of  these  people.  This  inference  has  been 
drawn  from  Col.  4:16,  17,  which,  it  is  daimed, 
shows  that  Archippus,  and  hence  also  his  parents 
Philemon  and  Apphia,  were  residents  of  Laodicea. 
But  the  injunction,  "  Say  to  Archippus,"  is  addressed 
to  the  Colossians  and  not  the  Laodiceans.  Further- 
more Onesimus  is  explicitly  called  a  Colossian  (Col. 
4  : 9).  The  evidence  is  rather  positively  in  favor  of 
their  all  being  Colossians. 

Philemon  was  evidently  a  man  of  considerable 
means,  who  had  placed  at  least  a  part  of  his  com- 
modious house  at  the  disposal  of  the  Colossian  Chris- 
tians (Philem.  2).  His  son  Archippus  is  enjoined  "to 
take  heed  to  the  ministry  which  thou  hast  received 
in  the  Lord  that  thou  fulfill  it"  (Col.  4 :  17).  This 
injunction    implies  that  he  stood  in  official  relation 


170  THE  PAULINE  EPISTLES. 

to  the  Colossian  church.  Philemon  was  a  convert 
of  the  Apostle  (Philem.  19)  and  manifestly  was  no  un- 
worthy son  of  his  spiritual  father.  '*  It  is  evident 
that  on  becoming  a  disciple  he  gave  no  common 
proof  of  the  sincerity  and  power  of  his  faith.  His 
character  as  shadowed  forth  in  the  Epistle  to  him, 
is  one  of  the  noblest  which  the  sacred  record  makes 
known  to  us.  He  was  full  of  faith  and  good  works, 
was  docile,  confiding,  grateful,  was  forgiving,  sympa- 
thizing, charitable,  and  a  man  who  on  a  question  of 
simple  justice  needed  only  a  hint  of  his  duty,  to  go 
even  beyond  it  (Philem.  21).  Any  one  who  studies  the 
Epistle  will  perceive  that  it  ascribes  to  him  these 
varied  qualities,  it  bestows  on  him  a  measure  of 
commendation  which  forms  a  striking  contrast  to 
the  ordinary  reserve  of  the  sacred  writers.  It  was 
through  such  believers  that  the  primitive  Christian- 
ity evinced  its  divine  origin  and  spread  so  rapidly 
among  the  nations." 

///.    The  Occasion  and  Design  of  the  Epistle. 

Onesimus,  the  bearer  of  this  letter,  was  the  runa- 
way slave  of  Philemon.  It  is  probable  that  he  had 
either  robbed  his  master,  or  caused  him  some  finan- 
cial loss  (vrs.  18)  which  the  Apostle  offers  to  make 
good.  Fugitive  slaves  found  a  peculiar  attraction  in 
Rome,  as  it  afforded  them  a  place  where  they  could 
not  be  easily  detected  and  apprehended.  "But  at 
Rome,"  writes  Bishop  Lightfoot,  "  the  Apostle  spread 
his  net  for  him,  and  he  was  caught  in  its  meshes. 
How  he  came  in  contact  with  the  imprisoned  mis- 
sionary we  can  only  conjecture.      Was  it  an  acci-s 


PHILEMON.  171 

dental  encounter  with  his  fellow-townsman  Epaphras 
in  the  streets  of  Rome,  which  led  to  the  interview  ? 
Was  it  the  pressure  of  want  which  induced  him 
to  seek  alms  from  one  whose  large-hearted  charity- 
must  have  been  a  household  word  in  his  master's 
family  ?  Or  did  the  memory  of  solemn  words,  which 
he  chanced  to  overhear  at  those  weekly  gatherings 
in  the  upper  chamber  at  Colossae,  haunt  him  in  his 
loneliness,  till,  yielding  to  the  fascination,  he  was 
constrained  to  unburden  himself  to  the  one  man 
who  could  soothe  his  terrors  and  satisfy  his  yearn- 
ings ?  Whatever  motive  may  have  drawn  him  to 
the  Apostle's  side,  —  whether  the  pangs  of  hunger 
or  the  gnawings  of  conscience, —  when  he  was  once 
in  the  range  of  attraction,  he  could  not  escape.  He 
listened,  was  impressed,  was  convinced,  was  bap- 
tized. The  slave  of  Philemon  became  the  freeman 
of  Christ." '' 

But  though  now  a  freeman  of  Christ,  Onesimus 
was  still  legally  the  slave  of  Philemon.  Paul  indeed 
felt  that  Philemon  owed  him  enough  to  justify  his 
retaining  Onesimus  with  him,  but  he  did  not  so  re- 
tain him.  In  regard  to  him  he  writes  to  Philemon, 
"Whom  I  would  have  retained  with  me,  that  in  thy 
stead  he  might  have  ministered  unto  me  in  the  bonds 
of  the  Gospel"  (vr.  13).  But  Paul  was  unwilling  to 
keep  him  without  his  owner's  free  consent,  so  he 
adds,  ''But  without  thy  mind  would  I  do  nothing; 
that  thy  benefit  should  not  be,  as  it  were,  of  neces- 
sity, but  willingly."  The  occasiofiy  then,  of  the  Epistle 
was  the  sending  of  Onesimus  back  to  his  master. 

The  object  of  the  letter  was  to  secure  the  slave's 
freedom.     He    consequently  urges  Philemon   to  re- 

W  Lightfoot  on  Col.  and  Philem.,  p.  312. 


172  THE  PAULINE  EPISTLES. 

ceive  him,  **  not  as  a  servant  [Greek,  bond-servant], 
but  above  a  servant,  a  brother  beloved,  specially  to 
me,  but  how  much  more  unto  thee,  both  in  the  flesh 
and  in  the  Lord.  If  thou  count  me,  therefore,  a 
partner,  receive  him  as  myself"  (vrs.  i6,  17).  And 
furthermore  the  Apostle  enjoins  Philemon,  **  If  he 
hath  wronged  thee  or  oweth  thee  ought,  put  that 
on  mine  account ;  I,  Paul,  have  written  it  with  mine 
own  hand,  I  will  repay  it"  (vrs.  18,  19).  And  to 
this,  Paul  adds  a  very  touching,  delicate  reference 
to  the  debt  that  Philemon  himself  owes  the  Apostle, 
saying,  "Albeit,  I  do  not  say  to  thee  how  thou 
owest  unto  me,  even  thine  own  self  besides."  It 
does  not  seem,  judging  from  the  character  of  Phile- 
mon delineated  in  this  Epistle,  that  this  touching 
and  earnest  appeal  could  have  failed  of  its  purpose. 
Paul  sent  Onesimus  back  to  Philemon,  not  to  con- 
demn him  again  to  the  bondage  of  human  slavery, 
but  with  such  a  letter  in  his  hand  as  would  certainly 
secure  his  freedom.  It  is  noticeable  that  the  Apos- 
tle does  not  ask  out  and  out  for  the  manumission  of 
Onesimus,  but  he  writes  in  such  a  way  that  Phile- 
mon could  not  help  granting  this,  even  if  he  was 
otherwise  minded.  "  Yea,  brother,  let  me  have  joy 
of  thee  in  the  Lord  :  refresh  my  bowels  in  the  Lord. 
Having  confidence  in  thy  obedience,  I  write  unto 
thee,  knowing  that  thou  wilt  also  do  more  than  I 
say."  Certainly  he  could  do  nothing  less  than  the 
Apostle  plainly  by  inference  asked  him  to  do. 

Tradition  busies  itself  with  the  after  history  of 
these  two  men,  making  them  bishops  over  different 
churches,  but  we  can  place  no  confidence  in  these 
traditions.  The  Lord  has  not  seen  fit  to  allow  us 
to  follow  their  history  any  further. 


PHILEMON.  173 

IV.   Contents  of  the  Epistle, 

1.  Salutation.     1-3. 

2.  Thanksgiving  for  Philemon's  character,  as 
manifested  in  his  attitude  toward  Christ  and  all 
believers.     4-7. 

3.  Main  portion  of  the  Epistle,  in  which  Phile- 
mon is  entreated  to  forget  and  forgive  the  past, 
and  to  receive  Onesimus  not  as  a  slave,  but  as  a 
friend   and  Christian   brother.     8-21. 

4.  Closing   salutations   and    benediction.     23-25. 

V.  Date  and  Place  of  Composition. 

This  matter  having  been  fully  discussed  under 
Colossians,  it  need  not  be  repeated.  It  was  written 
at  Rome  at  the  close  of  62  A.  D.,  or  early  in  63  A.  D. 
Onesimus  carried  it  to  its  destination.  It  was  writ- 
ten by  the  Apostle  without  the  usual  assistance  of 
an  amanuensis. 

VI.  Peculiarities. 

The  whole  Epistle  was  written  by  the  Apostle, 
he  dispensing  with  the  services  of  an  amanuensis  in 
this  case.  The  personal  character  and  object  of  the 
Epistle  excluded  any  doctrinal  statements.  It  is  a 
private  letter,  pertaining  to  matters  that  affected 
two  persons  in  particular.  Much  has  been  written 
about  the  literary  character  and  tone  of  this  letter. 
The  feelings  that  prompted  its  composition,  and 
that  are  so  manifest  in  every  line  of  it,  are  peculiarly 
attractive.  ''Dignity,  generosity,  prudence,  friend- 
ship, affection,  politeness,  skillful  address,  and  purity 
are  apparent.  Hence  it  has  been  called  with  great 
propriety,   the   polite  Epistle.     True   delicacy,   fine 


174  THE  PAULINE  EPISTLES. 

address,  consummate  courtesy,  nice  strokes  of  rhet- 
oric, make  it  a  unique  specimen  of  the  epistolary 
style.     It  shows  the  perfect  Christian  gentleman."*" 

This  Epistle  shows  also  the  way  in  which  Chris- 
tianity grapples  with  the  evils  of  human  society. 
To  have  directly  antagonized  the  institution  of  hu- 
man slavery,  inwrought  as  it  was  in  the  warp  and 
woof  of  the  Roman  Empire,  would  have  precipitated 
a  conflict  between  Rome  and  Christianity,  and  Rome 
would  have  turned  all  her  power  against  the  Chris- 
tian religion.  But,  as  Bishop  Wordsworth  writes, 
"The  Gospel  of  Christ  by  christianizing  the  master, 
enfranchised  the  slave.  It  did  not  legislate  about 
names  and  forms,  but  it  went  to  the  root  of  the  evil. 
It  spoke  to  the  heart  of  man.  When  the  heart  of 
the  master  was  stirred  with  divine  grace,  and  was 
warmed  with  the  love  of  Christ,  the  rest  would  soon 
follow.  The  lips  would  speak  kind  things,  the  hand 
would  do  liberal  things.  Every  Onesimus  would  be 
treated  by  every  Philemon  as  a  beloved  brother  in 
Christ  Jesus.  That  short  letter  from  'the  hired 
house' of  the  aged  Apostle,  'Christ's  bondman'  at 
Rome,  may  be  called  a  divine  act  of  emancipation  : 
one  far  more  powerful  than  any  edict  of  manumission 
by  sovereigns  and  Senates, — one  from  whose  sacred 
principles  all  human  statutes  for  the  abolition  of 
slavery  derive  their  virtue." 

In  these  days  when  so  much  hope  is  placed  on 
legislative  enactment  against  the  social  and  moral 
evils  of  human  society,  it  would  be  well  to  remember 
the  lessons  of  this  charming  little  Epistle.  Ere  the 
streams  are  purified,  the  sources  must  be  cleansed 

*<>  Quoted  from  Davidson  in  Gloag's  Introd.,  p.  304. 


EPHESIANS.  175 

So  the  heart  must  be  changed  ere  we  can  hope  for 
any  real  freedom  for  our  fellow-men  from  the  various 
shackles  which  sin  has  welded  around  them. 

IX.    THE   EPISTLE  TO   THE   EPHESIANS. 

/.  Canonicity. 

Few  of  the  books  of  the  New  Testament  have  a 
stronger  external  attestation  than  this  one  has. 
Clement  of  Rome  (96),  and  Barnabas  (106)  present 
such  coincidences  to  the  language  of  this  Epistle, 
as  to  show  their  use  of  it.  Of  Ignatius  (115)  it  may- 
be said  that  certain  words  in  the  shorter  Greek 
recension  of  his  letter  to  the  Ephesians  are  a  clear 
assertion  of  the  Pauline  authorship  of  this  Epistle. 
And  there  is  little  reason  for  denying  that  Polycarp 
(116)  had  it.  We  are  informed  by  Hippolytus  that 
Valentinus  (130)  quoted  it.  According  to  Tertullian 
it  was  contained  in  Marcion's  Catalogue  (130).  We 
can  see  it  named  in  the  Muratori  Canon  (i/o).  The 
Syriac  (160)  and  Old  Latin  (170)  Versions  contained 
it.  Irenaeus  (175),  Tertullian  (190),  and  Clement  of 
Alexandria  (195),  quote  it  by  name  and  as  of  Pauline 
origin.  And  then  in  connection  with  these  wit- 
nesses, attention  should  be  paid  to  the  marked  liter- 
ary dependence  of  First  Peter  upon  this  Epistle. 
Could  any  stronger  external  testimony  be  asked  for 
than  this } 

The  internal  evidence  is  none  the  less  positive 
in  its  support  of  the  Pauline  authorship  of  the  Epis- 
tle. The  most  striking  peculiarities  of  the  Apostle's 
matter  and  manner  abound  in  it.  Here  we  have 
numerous  examples  of  the  usual  strong  Pauline  esc- 


176  THE  PAULINE  EPISTLES. 

pressions ;  as  well  as  long  and  involved  periods, 
which  are  formed  by  an  accumulation  of  clauses 
joined  together  by  series  of  participles.  "  He  speaks 
of  the  exceeding  greatness  (1:19)  of  the  divine 
power ;  of  the  exceeding  riches  (2  :  7)  of  the  divine 
grace ;  of  himself  as  less  than  the  least  of  all  the 
saints  (3:8);  of  knowing  the  love  of  Christ  which 
passeth  knowledge  (3  :  19),  and  of  Christ  ascending 
far  above  all  heavens  (4:10).  So  also,  as  Paley 
remarks,  there  is  a  frequent  use  of  the  word  riches 
in  a  metaphorical  sense,  a  favorite  expression  of  the 
Apostle,  which  is  often  employed  in  his  other  Epis- 
tles, but  nowhere  so  frequently  as  in  this  Epistle."" 
(1:7,  18  ;  2:7;  3:8,  16).  But  of  all  the  peculiarities 
in  either  style  or  matter,  there  are  none  that  are  not 
paralleled  in  the  other  Pauline  Epistles. 

Against  all  this  testimony  it  has  been  urged  by 
some  that  this  Epistle  is  only  a  weak  and  verbose 
expansion  of  the  Epistle  to  the  Colossians.  The 
objectors  claim  that  it  is  at  best  a  weak  imitation  of 
genuine  Pauline  writings.  Referring  to  these  objec- 
tions Bishop  Ellicott  says  that  they  are  ''purely  of  a 
subjective  character,  being  mainly  founded  on  im- 
aginary weaknesses  in  style,  or  equally  imaginary 
references  to  early  Gnosticism,  and  have  been  so 
fairly  and  fully  confuted  that  they  can  no  longer  be 
considered  to  deserve  any  serious  consideration."*^ 
The  peculiar  absence  of  personal  salutations  to  in- 
dividuals, usually  found  in  the  Apostle's  letter,  has 
been  seized  upon  as  another  mark  of  its  un-Pauline 
origin.     But  the  purpose  and  the  destination  of  the 

^  Gloag's  Introd.  to  the  Pauline  Epistles,  p.  309. 
**Com.  on  Eph.  Introd.,  p.  12. 


EPHESIANS.  177 

letter  will  fully  account  for  this  feature.  It  was  sent 
not  only  to  the  Ephesian  church,  but  also  to  other 
churches,  as  it  is  really  an  encyclical  letter.  This 
fact  precludes  personal  salutations.  The  similarity 
of  this  letter  to  Colossians  was  occasioned  by  the 
fact  that  they  were  written  at  the  same  time  and 
forwarded  by  the  same  letter  carrier  to  their  respect- 
ive destinations,  and  also  because  they  were  sent  to 
the  same  general  locality,  having  very  much  the 
same  needs. 

Summing  up  the  case,  we  may  say  that  all  the 
direct  evidence  in  the  case  supports  its  Pauline 
authorship.  In  the  mind  of  the  Church  there  has 
never  been  a  doubt  about  this.  Doubts  have  only 
existed  in  the  minds  of  those  who  are  swayed  by  sub- 
jective considerations,  and  who  have  allowed  the 
objective  proof  to  sink  out  of  sight. 

//.  The  Ephesian  Church. 

Ephesus  was  the  capital  of  the  Roman  procon- 
sular province  of  Asia.  It  was  situated  on  the  river 
Cayster,  not  very  far  from  the  coast  of  the  ^gean 
Sea.  It  was  a  large  and  populous  city,  commanding 
a  large  share  of  the  commercial  interests  of  Asia 
Minor.  Its  situation  was  most  favorable  for  busi- 
nesses of  all  kinds,  for  at  its  docks  might  be  found 
the  vessels  of  every  maritime  nation,  while  from  it 
great  highways  led  out  in  many  directions  for  inland 
commerce.  One  of  the  so-called  seven  wonders  of 
the  world  was  to  be  seen  in  Ephesus  in  the  great 
temple  dedicated  to  Diana.  Thousands  of  people 
were  annually  attracted  to  the  city  by  the  religious 

12 


173  THE  PAULINE  EPISTLES, 

ceremonies  in  that  great  structure,  whose  one  hun- 
dred and  twenty-seven  magnificent  pillars  were  said 
to  have  been  the  gifts  of  a  like  number  of  kings. 
The  celebrity  of  this  city  was  doubtless  to  be  attrib- 
uted to  the  worship  of  its  patron  goddess  Diana. 

It  was  upon  his  second  missionary  journey,  as  he 
was  on  his  way  back  to  Jerusalem,  that  Paul  came 
to  Ephesus,  in  the  early  Spring  of  54  A.  D.  Paul 
in  company  with  Aquila  and  Priscilla  set  sail  from 
Corinth  and  came  to  Ephesus.  His  preaching  in 
the  synagogue  seems  to  have  met  with  immediate 
success,  and  he  was  requested  to  remain  there.  His 
plan,  however,  was  to  hasten  on  to  Jerusalem  to 
observe  the  approaching  feast  (Acts  18:21),  which 
was  probably  Pentecost,  and  occurred  that  year 
on  May  31.  In  accordance  with  this  plan,  leaving 
Aquila  and  Priscilla  in  Ephesus,  and  promising  to 
return  there  as  soon  as  he  could,  if  such  was  God's 
will,  Paul  went  on  to  Jerusalem,  where  he  tarried 
only  a  short  time,  and  then  proceeded  to  Antioch. 
It  was  probably  during  the  latter  part  of  the 
Summer  of  54  A.  D.  that  the  untiring  missionary  set 
out  on  his  third  missionary  journey.  After  passing 
through  Phrygia  and  Galatia,  "  strengthening  all 
the  disciples,"  he  came  late  in  the  same  year  to 
Ephesus,  where  he  remained  until  after  Pentecost 
of  57  A.  D. 

Meanwhile,  since  the  Apostle's  short  visit  to 
Ephesus,  a  man  who  was  to  play  an  important  part 
in  the  work  of  the  Church  had  come  to  and  gone 
from  that  city.  This  man  was  an  Alexandrian  Jew, 
named  Apollos,  who  had  in  some  way  become  a  dis- 
ciple of  John  the  Baptist.     He  was  an  earnest  and 


EPHESIANS.  179 

devout  person,  whose  desire  evidently  v/as  to  lead 
others  to  the  faith  in  which  he  believed.  He  knew, 
however,  only  the  baptism  of  John,  and  consequently 
he  could  not  speak  of  the  person  and  work  of  Him 
whose  coming  John  the  Baptist  had  foretold.  Well 
was  it  for  the  interests  of  the  work  that  Aquila  and 
Priscilla  were  in  Ephesus,  for  they  lost  no  time  in 
giving  ApoUos  the  instruction  he  needed.  In  this 
way  he  became  instructed  in  Christian  doctrine. 
Nor  was  his  zeal  any  the  less  abated  by  this  new 
acquisition  of  knowledge  ;  for  when  he  heard  of  the 
work  in  Corinth,  he  desired  to  go  there  and  labor  for 
the  Master.  On  the  arrival  of  Paul  in  Ephesus,  he 
found  twelve  other  men,  who,  like  Apollos,  were  dis- 
ciples of  John  the  Baptist.  John's  baptism  was  unto 
repentance,  but  when  they  heard  of  Christ  through 
Paul,  "they  were  baptised  in  the  name  of  the  Lord 
Jesus,"  at  the  same  time  receiving  the  baptism  of 
the  Spirit  which  was  accompanied  with  the  same 
phenomena  that  marked  the  great  Pentecostal  out- 
pouring. 

This  second  visit  of  Paul  at  Ephesus  was  charac- 
terized by  his  usual  intense  activity.  He  supported 
himself  by  laboring  at  his  trade  (Acts  20 :  34).  At 
the  same  time,  with  his  characteristic  zeal,  he 
preached  in  the  synagogue  for  three  months,  ''  dis- 
puting and  persuading  the  things  concerning  the 
kingdom  of  God."  The  success  that  crowned  his 
labors  led  his  Jewish  opponents  to  calumniate  his 
doctrine,  and  he  was  compelled  to  leave  the  syna- 
gogue. The  school-room  of  one  Tyrannus,  who 
became  a  convert,  afforded  him  a  place  for  continu- 
ing his  preaching.     Nor  were  his  efforts  for  Christ 


180  THE  PAULINE  EPISTLES. 

confined  to  preaching  on  the  Sabbath,  for  as  he 
told  the  Ephesian  elders,  he  taught  them  not  only 
publicly,  but  also  from  house  to  house,  warning 
them  with  tears  day  and  night  (Acts  20  :  20).  "  The 
subject  of  his  teaching  was  ever  the  same,  both  for 
Jews  and  Greeks,  *  repentance  towards  God,  and 
faith  towards  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ.'  Labors  so 
incessant,  so  disinterested,  and  continued  through 
so  long  a  time,  could  not  fail  to  produce  a  great 
result  at  Ephesus.  A  large  church  was  formed. 
Nor  were  the  results  confined  to  that  city  alone. 
Throughout  the  province  of  'Asia'  the  name  of 
Christ  became  generally  known,  both  to  Jews  and 
Gentiles ;  and,  doubtless,  many  daughter-churches 
were  founded,  whether  in  the  course  of  journeys 
undertaken  by  the  Apostle  himself,  or  by  means  of 
those  with  whom  he  became  acquainted,- — as  for 
instance,  by  Epaphras,  Archippus,  and  Philemon, 
in  connection  with  Colossae,  and  its  neighboring 
cities,  Hierapolis  and  Laodicea."*^  During  this 
period  he  also  seems  to  have  taken  a  hurried  trip 
to  Corinth." 

The  patron  goddess  of  Ephesus  was  Diana,  whose 
magnificent  temple  attracted  people  from  all  direc- 
tions. There  were  a  great  many  workmen  in  the 
city,  whose  business  was  that  of  making  for  sale  to 
visitors,  images  of  the  statue  of  the  goddess,  which 
was  said  to  have  fallen  down  from  heaven.  The  ra- 
pid spread  of  Christianity  and  its  inroads  into  the 
superstitious  practices  of  the  people,  imperiled  their 
craft.     The  special  powers  exercised  by  Paul  seem 

*SConybeare  &  Hovvson's  Life  of  Paul,  Vol.  II.,  p.  20. 
**  See  under  2  Corinthians, 


BPHESIANS.  181 

to  have  been  aimed  at  some  of  the  prevailing  super- 
stitions ;  while  the  results  of  the  rash  experiment 
of  the  sons  of  Sceva  (Acts  19:  13-16)  exalted  the 
Apostle's  work.  All  of  these  events  culminated  in 
the  great  riot  of  the  idol-makers  against  the  Chris- 
tians, which  probably  took  place  in  the  sacred 
month  of  May,  when  great  crowds  of  people  flocked 
to  the  temple  of  Diana.  The  riot  accomplished 
nothing,  and  as  soon  as  it  subsided,  Paul  called  the 
Christians  to  him,  and  with  many  injunctions  to 
them  he  departed  from  the  city  just  after  Pentecost, 
57  A.  D.  (i  Cor.  16:8.) 

In  regard  to  the  composition  of  the  Ephesian 
church,  it  is  evident  that  while  there  were  some 
Jews  in  it,  yet  the  large  majority  of  its  members 
were  Gentiles.  The  various  descriptive  phrases  of 
the  Epistle  prove  conclusively  that  the  church  there 
might  on  the  whole  be  called  a  Gentile  church  (2  : 
II  ;  3:1  ;  etc.). 

///.   The  Desti7iation  of  this  Epistle. 

It  is  a  fact  to  be  noted  in  regard  to  this  Epistle 
that  the  Vatican  and  Sinaitic  MSS  of  the  New  Tes- 
tament omit  the  words  **  at  Ephesus"  in  1:1,  the 
space  to  be  occupied  by  those  words  being  left  va- 
cant. This  has  led  many  to  the  conclusion  that  this 
Epistle  was  not  simply  written  for  the  Ephesians 
alone.  Paul  wrote  to  the  Colossians,  "And  when  this 
Epistle  is  read  among  you,  cause  that  it  be  read  also 
in  the  church  of  the  Laodiceans  ;  and  that  ye  like- 
wise read  the  Epistle  from  Laodicea"  (Col.  4 :  16). 
Some  scholars  claim  that  this  Epistle  to  the  Laodice- 


182  THE  PAULINE  EPISTLES. 

ans  is  now  lost ;  while  others  claim  that  it  was  none 
other  than  the  one  with  which  we  are  now  dealing. 
The  theory  is  that  Tychicus  bore  several  copies  of  this 
same  Epistle,  in  one  of  which  was  written  at  I  :  i  "  at 
Ephesus,"  in  another  "at  Laodicea,"  and  very  likely 
in  other  copies  other  names  were  inserted.  How 
natural  that  the  Apostle  should  enjoin  the  Colossians 
to  secure  the  copy  sent  to  the  church  nearest  to 
them,  that  is,  to  Laodicea.  In  support  of  this  theory 
is  the  encyclical  character  of  this  Epistle,  which  is 
general  in  its  nature,  and  includes  no  personal  sal- 
utations to  individuals.  The  Epistle  consequently 
was  not  intended  for  the  Ephesians  alone,  but  in 
general  for  that  group  of  churches  of  which  Ephesus 
was  the  undoubted  head.  This  theory,  first  pro- 
posed by  Archbishop  Usher  and  adopted  by  many 
of  the  leading  scholars  of  later  days,  meets  the  facts 
in  the  case  and  fully  harmonizes  them.  It  is  per- 
fectly correct  to  regard  the  Epistle  as  addressed  to 
the  Ephesians,  but  not  more  so  to  them  than  to  a  num- 
ber of  other  and  contiguous  churches,  of  which  num- 
ber Laodicea  was  one.  That  it  is  generally  called  the 
Epistle  to  the  Ephesians  is  quite  appropriate,  for  the 
Ephesian  church  was  the  most  prominent  of  those 
for  which  it  was  intended  ;  and  as  time  advanced, 
it  became  generally  known  as  the  Epistle  to  the 
Ephesians, 

IV.   The  Occasiojt  and  Object  of  the  Epistle. 

The  occasion  of  the  writing  of  this  letter  was 
doubtless  the  prospective  trip  of  Tychicus  to  the 
Colossian  church,  bearing  the  letter  addressed  to 
them.     Paul  had  heard,  possibly  through  Epaphras, 


EPHESIANS.  183 

of  the  faith  and  love  of  the  Christians  of  the  churches 
in  and  around  Ephesus  (Eph.  1:15).  These  two 
things  combined  led  him  to  embrace  the  favorable 
opportunity  of  sending  copies  of  this  letter  to  their 
various  destinations.  The  purpose  of  the  Apostle 
in  writing  was  not  so  much  to  combat  error,  as  it 
was  to  establish  the  truth.  He  desired  to  strengthen 
the  faith  and  encourage  the  hopes  of  the  Christians 
of  the  region  contiguous  to  Ephesus. 

V.  Contents  of  the  Epistle, 

I.  Salutation.       i  :  i,  2. 
11.   Doctrinal  Portion.     1:3-3:21. 

1.  Thanksgiving  for    the   blessings  of  the  re- 

demption in  Christ.     I  :  3-14. 

2.  Prayer    that    they   might    increase    in    the 

knowledge  and  experience  of  those  bless- 
ings.    i:i5-i9« 

3.  Dignity  of  him  who  wrought  out  Salvation, 

I  : 20-23 » 

4.  Contrasts  their  previous  state  with  that  after 

their  conversion  by  the  grace  of  God.  2  : 
I-IO, 

5.  Contrast  continued,  setting  forth  the  differ- 

ence between  their  former  condition  as 
aliens,  and  their  present  condition  as 
members  of  the  household  and  family  of 
Godo     2  :  ii-22o 

6.  The  nature  and  design  of  Paul's  commission. 

7.  Prays    for    those    to    whom    he    writes.     3  : 

14-2 1, 
IIL  Practical  Portion.    4 :  i-6  :  20, 


184  THE  PAULINE  EPISTLES. 

1.  Exhortation  to  unity.     4:  1-16. 

2.  Exhortation  to  holiness.     4  :  17-24. 

3.  Special  injunctions.     4:25-31. 

(i).  Against  lying,  25,  (2),  anger,  26,  27,  (3), 
robbery,  28,  (4),  impure  words.    29-3 1. 

4.  Exhortation  to  Christian  love  and  forgive- 

ness.    4  :  32-5  :  2. 

5.  Specific  exhortations.     5  :  3-20. 

(i).  Against    impurity,    3-10,  (2),    to   show 
forth  Christian  character,  1 1-20. 

6.  Definitions  of  duties  of,  5  :  21-6  :  9. 

(i).  Husbands   and   wives,    21-33,   (2),  chil- 
dren and  parents,  6  :  1-4,  (3),  servants 
.  and  masters,  6  :  5-9. 

(  7.)The  Christian's  armor  described.     6:  10-17. 
8.  The  need  of  prayer  and  its  uses.     6  :  18-20. 
IV.  Conclusion.     6:21-24. 

1.  The   duty   of  Tychicus,  the    letter   bearer. 

6  :  21,  22. 

2.  Benediction.     6:23,24. 

VI.    The  Date  and  Place  of  Composition. 

This  Epistle  was  written  at  Rome,  and  sent  to  its 
destination  by  the  hand  of  Tychicus  at  the  same 
time  that  he  carried  the  Epistle  to  the  Colossians, 
that  is,  late  in  62  A.  D.,  or  possibly  early  in  63  A.  D. 
Tychicus  was  also  to  tell  to  those  to  whom  it  was 
written,  the  facts  in  regard  to  the  Apostle,  as  well 
as  by  his  own  words  to  comfort  and  encourage  them. 

VII.   The  Peculiarities  of  the  Epistle. 

The  first  thing  noticeable  in  the  study  of  this 
Epistle   is   its   encyclical  character,  a  feature  that 


EPHESIANS.  185 

renders  it  devoid  of  the  customary  personal  saluta- 
tions of  the  Apostle. 

Another  peculiarity  is  its  great  similarity  in 
thought  and  language  to  the  Epistle  to  the  Colos- 
sians.  We  have  already  noted  the  fact  that  this 
characteristic  has  been  used  by  some  critics  in  a 
way  hostile  to  the  Epistle.  But  this  letter  is  by 
no  means  a  mere  expansion  of  Colossians.  ''These 
two  Epistles  are  similar,  and  yet  distinct ;  similar 
in  their  language  and  practical  exhortations  ;  dis- 
similar in  their  design  and  mode  of  doctrinal  treat- 
ment. The  Epistle  to  the  Colossians  is  polemical, 
and  aims  at  the  refutation  of  heresy ;  the  Epistle  to 
the  Ephesians  is  dogmatic,  and  serves  to  the  estab- 
lishment of  truth.  The  one  is  special,  and  deals  with 
the  errors  of  Jewish  Gnostics  ;  the  other  is  general, 
and  is  designed  for  the  edification  of  believers.  The 
one  is  a  Christian  apology  ;  the  other  is  a  doctrinal 
treatise  on  election  and  grace. "*^  Godet  writes,  "The 
central  idea  of  the  Epistle  to  the  Colossians  is  this : 
Christ  the  Head,  from  whom  the  body  derives  its 
nourishment ;  while  the  central  idea  of  what  we  call 
the  Epistle  to  the  Ephesians  is  the  Church,  the  body 
which  Christ  fills  with  His  divine  fullness,  and  raised 
to  sit  with  Him  in  the  heavenly  places.  Of  these 
two  thoughts,  which  supplement  each  other,  the 
second  was  suggested  by  the  first.  The  first  note 
struck  woke  the  vibrations  of  the  next ;  then  fol- 
lowed a  paean  of  Divine  harmonies.  What  could  be 
more  natural  than  that  two  strains  thus  suggested, 
should  have  many  tones  in  common,  though  each  set 
in  a  different  key?"*^ 

*5  Gloag'sliitrod.  to  the  Pauline  Epistles,  p.  334. 
**  Expositor,  3rd  Series,  Vol.  V.,  p.  2180. 


186  THE  PAULINE  EPISTLES, 

To  illustrate  the  similarity  between  these  two 
Epistles  the  following  passages,  cited  from  De 
Wette  by  Gloag,  may  be  compared,  namely:  — 

Doctrinal  Portions.  Practical  Portions. 

Eph  1:7 Coll  :i4  Eph.  4:1 Col.  i  :  10 

"    1:10 "1:20  "  4:2-4 "3:12-14 

"    1:15-17 "1:3.4  "  4:15.16 "2:19 

"    1 :  18 "1:27  "  i,\i'2-2\ "3:8,9 

"    1:21 "1:16  "  4:31 o "3:8 

"    1 :  22,  23 "  1 :  18,  19  "  4  :  32 ,  "  3  :  12 

"    2:5 "2:13  "=  5:6 "3:6 

"    2:11..... "2:11  "  5:15,16 "4:5 

"    2:16 "1:20  "  5:19,20...   "3:16,17 

"    3:2,3 .-     "1:25,   26  "  5:22 "3:18 

"    3-7 »...•     "1:23  "  6:1.. "3:20 

"  6:5-8...... "3:22-25 

"         6:9.  ......o "4:1 

"    6:18-20 "4:3,4 

"    6:21,22 "4:7,8 


.  This  Epistle,  because  of  its  grammatical  struct- 
ure, is  one  of  the  most  difficult  of  all  the  Pauline 
Epistles  in  the  explanation  of  some  of  its  parts. 
''Each  single  word  is  perfectly  intelligible  ;  but  the 
sentences  are  so  long,  and  the  members  of  which 
each  sentence  consists  are  at  the  same  time  so  short, 
that  they  are  frequently  capable  of  many  different 
constructions,  of  which  we  cannot  easily  determine 
which  is  the  right  one."*^ 

The  specially  noteworthy  passages  are  the  con- 
trasts between  the  unregenerate  and  the  regenerate 
(2  :  1-22),  the  prayer  of  the  Apostle  (3  :  13-21),  and 
the  description   of  the  Christian's  armor  (6:11-17). 

I  The   words   of  Dr.    Schaff  may   well   conclude   the 
study  of  this  Epistle,     "  Ephesians  is,  in  some  re- 
spects, the  most  profound  and  difficult  (though  not 
**Micliaelis'  Introd.,  Marsh's  translation.  Vol.  VL,p.  151, 


PHILIPPIANS.  187 

the  most  important)  of  Paul's  Epistles.  It  certainly 
is  the  most  spiritual  and  devout,  composed  in  an 
exalted  and  transcendent  state  of  mind,  where  the- 
ology runs  into  worship,  and  meditation  into  ora- 
tion. It  is  the  Epistle  of  the  Heavenlies,  an  ode 
to  Christ  and  His  spotless  bride,  the  Song  of  Songs 
in  the  New  Testament.  The  aged  Apostle  soared 
high  above  all  earthly  things  to  the  invisible  and 
eternal  realities  in  heaven.  From  his  gloomy  con- 
finement he  transcended  for  a  season  to  the  mount 
of  transfiguration.  The  prisoner  of  Christ,  chained 
to  a  heathen  soldier,  was  transformed  into  a  con- 
queror, clad  in  the  panoply  of  God,  and  singing  a 
paean  of  victory."**  i 

X.    THE   EPISTLE   TO   THE   PHILIPPIANS. 

/.    Canonicity. 

The  external  testimony  in  favor  of  this  Epistle  is 
remarkably  full  and  strong.  Clement  of  Rome  (96) 
shows  his  dependence  on  it,  and  the  same  is  true  of 
Ignatius  (115).  Polycarp  (116)  wrote  a  letter  to  the 
Philippians  in  which  he  refers  definitely  to  the  fact 
of  Paul's  having  written  to  them,  and  in  several 
places  he  uses  the  very  language  of  this  Epistle. 
In  the  Testaments  of  the  Twelve  Patriarchs  (120) 
several  expressions  are  borrowed  from  this  Epistle. 
The  Epistle  to  Diognetus  (117),  Justin  Martyr  (145), 
Mehto  (170),  Theophilus  (175),  adopt  its  language 
and  supply  references  to  it.  The  Epistle  of  the 
churches  of  Lyons  and  Vienne  (177)  quotes  Phil. 
2  :  6.     Marcion's  catalogue  (130),  the  Muratori  Canon 

"  Schaff' s  History  of  the  Christian  Church,  Vol.  L,  p.  779. 


188  THE  PAULINE  EPISTLES. 

(170),  and  the  Syriac  (160)  and  Old  Latin  (170)  Ver- 
sions, include  it.  And  when  we  come  to  Irenaeus 
(175),  TertuUian  (190),  and  Clement  of  Alexandria 
(195),  we  find  it  formally  quoted  by  name  and  as- 
cribed to  the  Apostle. 

The  internal  evidence  is  likewise  strong.  The 
Epistle  abounds  in  words  and  expressions  and  con- 
structions that  are  peculiar  to  Paul  alone.  The 
character  of  the  Apostle  is  also  plainly  stamped 
upon  it.  "  No  Epistle  of  the  Apostle,"  says  Schen- 
kel,  "  according  to  our  observations,  bears  the 
impress  of  authenticity  in  such  unmistakable  char- 
acters as  the  Epistle  to  the  Philippians."  Dean 
Gwynn  writes,  *'  But  greater  far  than  these  tokens 
of  genuineness,  is  that  which  underlies :  the  solid 
and  irrefragable  evidence  contained  in  the  ideas, 
the  feelings,  the  aspirations,  of  which  our  Epistle 
is  the  vehicle,  and  which  no  one  who  has  in  any 
degree  entered  into  the  mind  of  St.  Paul,  can  doubt 
to  be  his.  For  a  forger  successfully  to  assume  his 
language,  and  to  imagine  his  circumstances,  would 
be  a  difficult  effort  of  historic  and  literary  skill. 
But  that  such  a  one  could  so  personate  that  unique 
individuality  —  think  his  thoughts,  speak  out  of  his 
heart  —  is  inconceivable."*^  With  his  usual  skill 
Dr.  Gloag  sums  up  the  evidences  of  the  character 
of  Paul  as  impressed  on  this  Epistle.  "The  intense 
devotion  to  Christ  (i  :  20),  the  ardent  affection  for 
his  converts  (i  :  7,  8  ;  4:1),  the  earnestness  in  prayer 
for  their  spiritual  welfare  (i  14),  the  womanly  tender- 
ness (4  :  10),  the  delicate  courtesy  displayed  in  the 
reception  of  the  gifts  of  the  Philippians  (4 :  14-19), 
*^  Bible  Com.,  Introd.  to  Philippians. 


PHJLIPPIANS,  189 

the  noble  elevation  above  all  earthy  cares  (4 :  12), 
the  personal  humility  combined  with  the  assertion 
of  apostolic  authority  (3:4-11),  and  the  liberality 
of  mind  (i  :  18),  are  all  distinguishing  features  in  the 
character  of  the  great  Apostle."^® 

In  view  of  this  evidence  we  may  with  Dean 
Alford  characterize  the  few  and  weak  assaults  upon 
this  Epistle  as  "an  instance  of  the  insanity  of  hyper- 
criticism."  To  the  mind  swayed  more  by  objective 
testimony  than  by  subjective  considerations,  there 
cannot  come  any  doubt  that  this  is  a  genuine  Epistle 
of  Paul.  And  if  this  is  established,  its  canonicity  is 
likewise  demonstrated. 

//.   The  Philippian  Church. 

The  city  of  Philippi  was  founded  by  Philip  of 
Macedon,  who  gave  to  it  his  own  name.  To  this 
city  was  given  by  Caesar  Augustus  the  privileges 
of  a  Roman  colony.  It  was  one  of  the  most  impor- 
tant cities  of  Macedonia.  Its  situation  was  about 
nine  miles  inland  from  the  iEgean  Sea  at  its 
extreme  north-western  corner.  Neapolis  was  its 
sea-port.  The  great  Egnatian  highway  built  by 
Rome  across  Macedonia  and  up  into  Thrace  passed 
through  Philippi.  The  surrounding  plains  were 
rich  and  fertile.  With  these  natural  advantages  it 
was  a  large  and  thriving  city,  and  was  situated  at 
"the  confluence  of  streams  of  European  and  Asiatic 
life."  It  was  a  Roman  colony  on  Greek  soil,  with 
Grecian  language,  usages,  and  religion.  "  Combin- 
ing thus  the  two  main  constituents  of  European  life, 

s^'Introd.,  to  the  Pauline  Epistles  p.  337. 


190  THE  PAULINE  EPISTLES. 

giving  entrance  to  every  element  that  Europe  drew 
to  itself  from  the  wider  life  without,  it  was  in  all 
points  a  typical  city  of  Europe  ;  it  offered  itself  as 
a  fit  station  for  the  planting  of  the  standard — first 
raised  in  the  East,  but  destined  to  have  in  the  West 
its  greatest  and  abiding  triumphs  —  of  Him  whose 
kingdom  was  to  rise  in  the  ruins  of  the  kingdoms 
of  this  world,  itself  to  stand  forever."  ^^ 

To  this  city  Paul  came  on  his  second  mission- 
ary journey.  It  was  at  Alexandria  Troas  that  the 
Apostle  heard  the  Macedonian  call  (Acts  i6 : 9). 
In  obedience  to  it  he  immediately  crossed  the 
^gean  Sea  with  his  companions,  Silas,  Timothy, 
and  Luke,  and  landing  at  Neapolis,  they  passed  on 
together  to  Philippi.  There  were  not  a  great  many 
Jews  in  this  city,  for  there  does  not  seem  to  have 
been  a  synagogue.  The  following  Sabbath  the  mis- 
sionary band  found  a  few  devout  women  gathered 
for  prayer  at  a  Proseucha^^  outside  of  the  city  on  the 
banks  of  the  Gangites.  The  first  convert  made  was 
Lydia,  an  Asiatic  of  Thyatira,  a  dealer  in  dyed 
goods,  who  had  previously  become  a  proselyte  to 
the  Jewish  faith.  Her  opened  heart  responded 
to  the  words  of  Paul,  and  immediately  she  em- 
braced the  faith  in  Christ.  Being  apparently  a 
woman  of  at  least  comfortable  circumstances,  she 
persuaded  the  missionaries  to  become  her  guests. 
The  next  convert  mentioned  was  the  crazy  young 
Macedonian  girl  whom  Paul  healed.  Her  owners, 
who  had  made  her  crazy  muttering  a  source  of 
income,    enraged    at    the    change    wrought    in    her, 

51  Bible  Commentary,  Introd.  to  Philippians. 

52  A  place  of  prayer. 


PHILIPPIANS,  191 

seized  Paul  and  Silas  and  brought  them  before  the 
magistrates,  accusing  them  of  being  troublers  of 
the  peace.  Without  even  the  formality  of  inves- 
tigating these  charges,  the  magistrates  commanded 
that  they  should  be  scourged  and  put  in  prison. 
And  the  jailor,  a  brutal  man,  added  to  the  injus- 
tice of  the  whole  affair  by  making  their  feet  fast 
in  the  stocks  in  the  inner  prison.  That  night  a 
sudden  earthquake  shook  the  prison  to  its  founda- 
tion and  hurled  the  doors  wide  open.  This  earth- 
quake and  the  attendant  circumstances  brought 
conviction  to  the  heart  of  the  jailor,  and  ere  the 
light  of  another  day  had  shone  on  the  city,  he 
also  had  become  a  follower  of  the  Saviour.  The 
Roman  citizenship  of  the  Apostle  had  been  grossly 
violated  by  the  treatment  he  had  experienced,  and 
when  the  magistrates  learned  their  error,  they 
gladly  tried  to  make  amends  for  their  conduct.  It 
was  contrary  to  the  law  to  scourge  a  Roman  citi- 
zen who  had  not  been  condemned  by  due  process. 
Had  Paul  seen  fit  to  lodge  information  against  the 
Philippian  magistrates,  he  could  have  had  them 
severely  punished.  Immediately  after  his  release, 
the  Apostle,  leaving  Luke  at  Philippi,  continued 
his  journey.  Some  five  years  later  he  spent  a  few 
days  in  this  city  again  on  his  third  missionary 
journey.  That  was  some  time  after  Pentecost  in 
57  A.  D.  The  following  Passover  (Mar.  27,  58  A.  D.) 
was  also  spent  at  Philippi  (Acts  20:6). 

From  this  sketch  it  is  evident  that  Paul  was  not 
permitted  to  spend  very  much  time  with  his  beloved 
Philippians.  There  were,  however,  many  oral  com- 
munications between  them.     Paul  had  scarcely  left 


192  THE  PAULINE  EPISTLES. 

them  after  his  first  visit,  ere  they  had  sent  an  offer- 
ing for  his  aid.  "Even  in  Thessalonica  ye  sent  once 
and  again  unto  my  necessity"  (Phil.  4:  16).  It  was 
most  probably  to  them  that  the  Apostle  referred  in 
2  Cor.  8:3,4,  "For  to  their  power  I  bear  record, 
yea,  and  beyond  their  power  they  were  willing  of 
themselves  ;  praying  us  with  much  entreaty  that  we 
would  receive  their  gift."  Nor  was  it  out  of  their 
abundance  that  they  gave  to  the  Apostle  for  his  own 
needs,  as  well  as  for  the  poor  saints  at  Jerusalem,  but 
out  of  "their  deep  poverty."  For  some  time  pre- 
vious to  the  writing  of  this  Epistle,  the  Philippians 
had  lacked  opportunity  of  ministering  to  the  Apos- 
tle*^s  necessities.  At  length,  however,  they  had  heard 
of  his  needs  in  Rome,  and  immediately  they  took 
steps  to  relieve  him.  They  sent  their  offering  by 
the  hand  of  Epaphroditus,  one  of  their  number,  who 
was  also  to  do  all  in  his  power  for  the  beloved 
Apostle.  It  was  a  timely  and  precious  testimonial 
of  their  love  for  Paul.  It  relieved  his  pressing  needs 
and  distress,  and  he  writes,  "I  have  all  and  abound. 
I  am  full,  having  received  of  Epaphroditus  the  things 
which  were  sent  from  you." 

As  he  wrote,  Paul  hoped  to  see  them  very  soon, 
and  doubtless,  when  he  was  released,  he  went  as 
quickly  as  possible  to  those  people  who  had  given 
him  such  substantial  evidence  of  their  love  and  sym- 
pathy. About  fifty  years  after  this  Ignatius  passed 
through  this  city  on  his  way  to  Rome  to  die  a  mar- 
tyr's death,  and  he  was  warmly  welcomed  by  the 
Philippian  Christians.  It  was  in  1 16  A.  D.  that  Poly- 
carp  wrote  his  well  known  letter  to  these  same 
people.  "  But  not  long  did  the  promising  church 
remain.    Of  its  destruction  and  decay,  no  record 


PHILIPPIANS.  193 

is  left ;  and  among  its  ruins,  travelers  have  hith- 
erto failed  to  find  any  Christian  remains.  Of  the 
church  which  stood  foremost  among  all  the  apos- 
tolic communities  in  faith  and  love,  it  may  literally 
be  said,  that  not  one  stone  stands  upon  another. 
Its  whole  career  is  a  signal  monument  of  the  inscru- 
table counsels  of  God.  Born  into  the  world  with 
highest  promise,  the  church  of  Philippi  has  lived 
without  a  history,  and  perished  without  a  me- 
morial." ^^ 

The  Philippian  church  was  unquestionably  Gen- 
tile in  its  composition.  Three  of  its  members  are 
mentioned,  namely,  Lydia,  the  crazy  girl  who  was 
healed,  and  the  jailor.  They  were  respectively 
Asiatic,  Macedonian,  and  Roman.  It  was  a  cosmo- 
politan church  indeed,  embracing  several  different 
nationalities.  Woman  was  prominent  in  this  church. 
Two  of  these  women,  Euodia  and  Syntyche  are 
mentioned.  It  was  to  women  that  the  Gospel  was 
first  preached  in  Philippi,  and  it  seems  from  the 
references  to  them  that  the  two  named,  whose  aid 
Paul  gratefully  acknowledges,  had  differences  or 
jealousies  that  might  work  mischief  in  the  church 
unless  ended.  With  this  exception  the  Apostle 
knows  of  nothing  for  which  to  condemn  them.  On 
the  contrary  their  loving  regard  for,  and  attention 
to,  Paul  elicits  from  him  the  warmest  and  most  affec- 
tionate expressions. 

///.    The  Occasion  and  Object  of  the  Epistle. 

Epaphroditus,  the  messengerof  the  Philippians, 
now  convalescing  from  the  serious  illness  he  had 
had  as  the  result  of  his  zealous  service  of  Paul,  was 

^3  Lightfoot  on  Philippians,  p.  65. 
13 


194  THE  PAULINE  EPISTLES. 

about Jto_retura  toJiis  Jiom,e_ajt_Phnippi.  This  op- 
portunity of  addressing  a  letter  of  thanks  to  the 
Philippians  for  their  liberal  offering  to  his  necessities 
was  the  occasion  of  the  Apostle's  writing.  Of  Epaph- 
roditus,  their  messenger,  he  writes,  **  For  the  work 
of  Christ,  he  was  nigh  unto  death,  not  regarding 
his  life,  to  supply  your  lack  of  service  toward  me." 
The  special  object  of  the  Epistle  was  to  express  his 
genuine  thankfulness  to  the  Philippians  for  their 
gift.  It  is  peculiarly  a  letter  of  gratitude,  and  in 
connection  with  this  he  uses  the  opportunity  to 
attempt  to  reconcile  some  differences  that  had 
arisen  among  some  of  them,  as  well  as  to  warn 
them   against   error. 

There  seems  to  have  been  a  change  in  the  Apos- 
tle's position  since  he  wrote  his  last  letter.  It  may 
be  that  the  death  of  Burrhus,  the  humane  Praetorian 
Prefect,  had  occurred,  and  that  the  accession  of  the 
infamous  Tigellinus  had  caused  this  change.  Paul 
writes  that  '*  all  seek  their  own,  and  not  the  things 
of  Jesus  Christ's."  The  apparent  lack  of  attention 
from  the  Roman  Christians  made  the  gift  of  the 
Philippians  all  the  more  acceptable,  and  in  this 
loving  letter  the  great  Apostle  shows  his  deep  ap- 
preciation of  their  kindness.  In  this  letter  the 
Apostle  informs  the  Philippians  that  he  proposes 
to  send  Timothy  to  them  just  as  soon  as  he  knows 
how  his  case  before  Nero_tuxn£^._out__{2_^3}_^  His 
purpose  in  senHing  Timothy  is  "  that  I  also  may 
be  of  good  comfort,  when  I  know  your  state,"  and 
also  to  inform  them  of  the  outcome  of  his  trial. 
He  can  think  of  no  other  person  so  well  fitted  to 
discharge     this    commission,    indeed,    he     has     no 


PHJLIPPIANS.  195 

other  person  with  him  to  whom  he  can  entrust  the 
business. 

IV.  Contents  of  the  Epistle, 

There  is  no  apparent  plan  in  the  structure  of  this 
Epistle.  The  circumstances  under  which  he  wrote, 
as  well  as  the  feelings  prompting  the  letter,  would 
not  permit  of  any  formal  and  logical  arrangement. 

1.  Salutation,     i  :  i,  2. 

2.  Thanksgiving,    and   prayer  for   the    Philippian 

Christians,     i  :  3-1 1. 

3.  Account  of  the  progress  of  the  Gospel  in  Rome, 

as  well  as  his  position,  feelings,  and    hopes. 
I  :  12-26. 

4.  Exhortations,      i  :  27-2  :  16. 

(i.)  To  be  consistent,  of  one  mind  and  of  heroic 

faith.     I  :  27-2  ;  4. 
(2.)  To  consider  Christ,  the  great  example    of 

humility.     2  :  5-1 1. 
(3.)  To    follow    His    example    practically.      2: 

12-16. 

5.  Personal  matters.     2:17-30. 
(i.)  Personal  appeal.      2:17,18. 

(2.)  The  proposed  visit  of    Timothy  to    them. 

2 : 19-23. 
(3.)  Expression  of  hope  of  seeing   them  soon. 

2  :24. 
(4.)  Mission    and    illness  of  Epaphroditus.      2  : 

25-30. 

6.  Final  exhortations  begun,  3  :  i,    but  suddenly 

broken  off  by  a  digression  to  warn  them, 
(i.)  Against  Judaistic  error,  illustrated  by  his 
own  example.     3  :  2-16, 


196  THE  PAULINE  EPISTLES, 

(2.)  Against  Antinomian  error,  pointing  again 
to  his  own  example,  and,  warning 
against  turning  from  the  right  path, 
he  appeals  to  them  to  live  according 
to  their  heavenly  citizenship.     3  :  17-21. 

7.  Resumption  of  exhortations.     4  :  1-9. 

(i.)  Urges  them  to  stand  fast  in  the  Lord. 
4:1. 

(2.)  Appeals  to  Euodia  and  Syntyche  to  be  of 
one  mind.     4  :  2,  3. 

(3.)  Exhorts  them  to  be  joyful,  free  from  har- 
assing care,  and  to  follow  that  which 
is  pure  and  true,  etc.     4  :4-9. 

8.  Acknowledges  gratefully  their  gift  and  invokes 

a  blessing  on  them.     4  :  10-20. 

9.  Closing  salutations  and  benediction.     4:21-23. 

F.   The  Date  and  Place  of  Composition, 

The  order  in  which  these  Epistles  of  the  captivity 
have  been  treated  shows  that  this  one  is  regarded 
as  the  last  one  of  them.  It  has  already  been  noted  ^* 
that  some  claim  that  the  other  three  Epistles  of  this 
group  were  written  at  Caesarea,  but  with  only  a  very 
few  exceptions  scholars  unite  in  holding  that  this  Epis- 
tle was  written  at  Rome.  Of  this  there  is  no  reason 
for  any  question,  A  close  examination  of  the  Epis- 
tle makes  it  manifest  that  some  change  had  come 
over  the  affairs  of  the  Apostle  since  he  wrote  the 
other  three  letters.  Here  he  more  plainly  expresses 
the  hope  that  he  would  soon  be  released,  although 
all  is  as  yet  darkly  uncertain  in  regard  to  his  future 

5*  See  under  Colossians. 


PHILIPPIANS.  197 

(2 :  23).  The  accession  of  Tigellinus  in  62  A.  D.  to 
the  Praetorian  Prefectship  doubtless  made  the  Apos- 
tle's confinement  more  severe.  By  him  he  would 
not  be  treated  with  as  much  consideration  as  had 
been  accorded  him  by  the  humane  Burrhus.  Luke 
and  Aristarchus,  who  were  with  him  when  he  wrote 
Colossians,  were  now  absent, —  possibly  on  some 
errand,  or,  perhaps,  driven  away  by  the  change  in 
Paul's  affairs.  The  confinement  was  closer,  and, 
although  hopeful,  Paul  was  doubtful  about  the  issue 
of  the  near  future.  Was  it  not  the  darkest  hour  just 
before  the  dawn  of  his  release  .-* 

Another  fact  that  necessitates  placing  this  letter 
late  in  the  two  years  of  his  confinement  at  Rome  is 
developed  when  the  mission  of  Epaphroditus  is  con- 
sidered. Sufficient  time  must  have  elapsed  after 
Paul's  arrival  in  Rome  for  him  to  reach  a  point 
of  need  ;  for  the  Philippians  to  have  heard  of  that 
need  and  to  have  made  preparation  for  his  relief; 
for  Epaphroditus,  their  messenger,  to  go  to  Rome 
in  the  behalf  of  Paul ;  for  another  messenger  to  re- 
turn to  Philippi  with  the  news  of  his  serious  illness  ; 
for  another  messenger  to  go  to  Rome  with  their 
message  of  condolence  and  sympathy  for  Epaphro- 
ditus. It  would  ordinarily  take  at  least  a  month 
for  the  journey  between  the  two  cities.  For  this 
reason  this  letter  must  be  dated  toward  the  end  of 
the  captivity. 

In  view  of  these  things,  while  we  cannot  affirm 
it  absolutely,  yet  we  date  this  Epistle  in  the  Spring 
of  63  A.  D.,  several  months  later  than  the  composi- 
tion of  the  other  three    letters  of  this   group.     It 


198  THE  PAULINE  EPISTLES, 

was  carried  to  its  destination  by  the  convalescent 
Epaphroditus,  as  he  returned  to  his  home  in  Philippi. 

VI.  Peculiarities. 

}  This  Epistle  is  peculiar  in  that  it  is  pre-eminently 
a  letter  of  commendation,  and  has  in  it  no  notes  of 
condemnation.  In  this  respect  it  is  in  marked"  con- 
trast with  the  Epistle  to  the  Galatians.  Here  we 
can  read  more  clearly  than  any  other  place  the  inner 
character  of  the  great  Apostle  to  the  Gentiles.  "He 
gives  full  vent  to  the  expressions  of  his  affection  for 
his  Philippian  converts ;  he  mentions  his  earnest 
prayer  for  their  spiritual  advancement,  his  tender 
solicitations,  his  joy  at  the  steadfastness  of  their 
faith  and  the  purity  of  their  conduct.  The  whole 
Epistle  is  a  mixture  of  love  and  joy, —  love  for  his 
converts,  and  joy  at  their  spiritual  welfare. "^^ 

Another  feature  is  the  absence  of  doctrinal  dis- 
cussions. It  contains,  it  is  true,  the  classical  passage 
on  the  humiliation  and  the  exaltation  of  Christ, 
which  is  likewise  the  nearest  approach  Paul  makes 
in  any  of  his  Epistles  to  a  dogmatic  affirmation  of 
the  divinity  of  our  Lord  (2:5-11).  But  this  pas- 
sage was  written  to  emphasize  and  illustrate  an  ex- 
hortation, rather  than  for  polemical  reasons.  The 
whole  Epistle  is  concerned  rather  with  practice  than 
with  dogma.  It  is  pre-eminently  the  Epistle  of  joy 
and  love. 

3»   ITbe  ipastoral  :iBpf0tle0» 

We  have  now  come  in  our   studies  to  the  third 
and  last  group  of  the  Pauline    Epistles,  commonly 
known  as  the  Pastoral  Epistles.     This  title  has  been 
^^Gloag's  Introd.,  to  the  Pauline  Epistles,  p.  353. 


THE  PASTORAL  EPISTLES,  199 

applied  to  them  ''because  they  are  official  letters 
addressed  to  Paul's  fellow-laborers,  and  contain  in- 
structions concerning  the  government  of  the  Church 
and  its  office  bearers."  Merely  a  cursory  examina- 
tion of  them  will  suffice  to  show  that  they  are  differ- 
ent in  many  respects  from  the  other  Pauline  Epistles, 
and  form  a  distinct  group  by  themselves. 

Before  formally  entering  in  upon  the  study  of 
these  Epistles  in  their  chronological  order,  it  is 
necessary  to  pause  to  consider  the  movements  of 
the  Apostle  after  he  wrote  the  Epistle  to  the  Phil- 
ippians  in  the  Spring  of  63  A.  D.  The  question 
now  arises :  Was  Paul  released  from  his  Roman 
imprisonment  in  accordance  with  the  hope  ex- 
pressed in  Philippians  ?  Was  his  trial  before  Nero 
ended  by  his  condemnation  and  death,  as  some 
assert ;  or  by  his  acquittal  and  liberation,  as  others 
confidently  affirm  ?  Upon  this  question  a  vast 
mass  of  matter  has  been  written,  and  it  will  be 
impossible  to  follow  up  all  the  various  theories  that 
have  been  propounded  for  the  purpose  of  explaining 
the  facts.  But  if  we  would  be  guided  by  the  unani- 
mous and  unhesitating  belief  of  the  early  Church, 
we  must  hold  to  his  release  and  a  subsequent  time 
of  activity,  followed  by  a  second  imprisonment  that 
resulted  in  his  condemnation  and  death.  "It  was 
universally  believed  that  St.  Paul's  appeal  to  Caesar 
terminated  successfully ;  that  he  was  acquitted  of 
the  charge  laid  against  him ;  and  that  he  spent 
some  years  in  freedom  before  he  was  again  impris- 
oned and  condemned.  TJie  evidence  on  this  subject^ 
though  not  copioiiSy  is  yet  conclusive  so  far  as  it 
goeSy  and  is  all  one  way!'^^  This  evidence  is  pre- 
6<^Conybeare  and  Howson's  St.  Paul,  Vol.  II.,  p.  437. 


200  THE  PAULINE  EPISTLES. 

sented  by  the  Epistles  themselves,  by  Clement  of 
Rome,  the  Muratori  Canon,  Eusebius  the  historian, 
Chrysostom,  and  Jerome.  They  all  are  positive  in 
their  affirmations,  or  at  least,  in  their  intimations, 
that  Paul  was  released. 

It  is  generally  acknowledged  that  we  cannot  find 
any  place  in  the  history  of  the  Apostle,  as  we  know 
it  from  the  Acts,  into  which  these  Epistles  will  fit. 
The  historical  allusions  they  contain  do  not,  and 
cannot  be  made  to,  harmonize  with  the  Acts.  It  is 
a  matter  of  fact  that  those  who  deny  that  Paul  was 
released  from  the  Roman  imprisonment  of  Acts  28, 
as  a  rule  reject  these  Epistles,  inasmuch  as  they  can 
find  no  place  for  them  in  the  life  of  the  Apostle  up 
to  that  time.  On  the  other  hand,  the  large  majority 
of  those  who  do  defend  and  accept  these  Epistles 
as  Pauline,  affirm  that  Paul  was  released.  It  has 
been  said  that  "the  supposition  of  a  second  Roman 
imprisonment  is  the  only  way  in  which  the  genu- 
ineness of  the  Pastoral  Epistles  can  be  proved. 
This  concession  alone  can  solve  the  serious  dif- 
ficulties." Many  are  the  schemes  that  have  been 
proposed  by  which  the  attempt  has  been  made 
to  find  a  place  before  and  during  the  time  of  the 
first  imprisonment  for  the  composition  of  these 
Epistles.^^  And  those  who  doubt  the  liberation  of 
Paul  are  compelled  to  resort  to  all  sorts  of  expedi- 
ents   to    enable    them    to    explain    the    allusions    of 

57  The  scope  of  this  work  will  not  permit  an  elaborate  examination 
of  this  question.  The  reader  is  referred  to  Conybeare  and  Howson's 
Life  and  Letters  of  St,  Paul,  p.  354  ff.;  The  Bible  Commentary, 
Introd.  to  the  Pastoral  Epistles;  Gloag's  Introd.,  p.  354;  Huther's 
Commentary  on  the  Pastoral  Epistles  ;  Weiss'  Introd.,  Vol.  I.,  p.  374. 


THE  PASTORAL  EPISTLES.  201 

these  Epistles.  They  all,  however,  in  the  judgment 
of  the  majority  of  scholars  fail  to  prove  their 
point.  ^^ 

If,  then,  we  are  to  accept  the  external  evidence, 
we  must  acknowledge  the  release  of  Paul  from  his 
first  Roman  imprisonment.  And  when  we  turn  to 
these  Pastoral  Epistles,  every  candid  mind  must 
confess  that  they  refer  to  facts  that  necessitate  the 
same  conclusion.  These  facts  will  be  particularly 
noted  when  the  dates  of  these  letters  are  respect- 
ively considered. 

It  is  extremely  difficult  to  determine  exactly  the 
movements  of  the  Apostle  after  his  release.  For 
these  we  are  dependent  entirely  on  the  incidental 
references  of  the  letters  in  question.  The  following 
is  suggested,  however,  as  a  possible  outline  of  Paul's 
movements  after  his  release.  During  the  early  Sum- 
mer of  63  A.  D.,  the  long  delayed  final  trial  before 
Nero  came  up,  and  resulted  in  the  acquittal  of  the 
Apostle.  Leaving  Rome  as  soon  as  possible  there- 
after, Paul  followed  the  plan  indicated  in  Philemon 
22  and  Philippians  2  :  24.  This  would  take  him  di- 
rectly into  Macedonia,  where  he  in  all  probability 
visited  rapidly  all  the  churches  along  and  near  the 
line  of  the  Egnatian  highway.  At  Philippi  he  re- 
mained for  a  time,  but  his  presence  being  needed 
in  Asia  Minor  because  of  the  growth  of  heresy,  he 
pressed  on  to  Ephesus.  Affairs  there  required  con- 
siderable   attention,    and    doubtless   while    in    that 

^^In  regard  to  Weiss,  it  is  to  be  noted,  that  while  he  will  not 
absolutely  assert  the  genuineness  of  these  Epistles,  yet  he  actually 
proves  that  point,  and  in  so  doing  also  establishes  the  fact  of  the 
Apostle's  release. 


202  THE  PAULINE  EPISTLES. 

locality  he  visited  the  churches  of  Colossae  and 
Laodicea. 

At  length  having  straightened  out  matters  in 
and  about  Ephesus,  he  took  his  long  contemplated 
visit  to  the  far  West  in  64  A.  D.  (Rom.  15  :  24).  We 
have  no  means  of  telling  how  long  he  remained  in 
Spain.  The  persistency  and  unanimity  of  the  tradi- 
tion that  he  did  make  this  journey,  can  only  be  ac- 
counted for  on  the  basis  that  he  actually  did  make 
it.  Returning  from  the  West,  he  came  once  more 
to  Ephesus  in  66  A.  D.  Here  he  found  that  the 
Gnostic  heretics  had  been  intensely  active  during 
his  absence,  and  were  doing  their  utmost  to  propa- 
gate their  peculiar  theories.  **  Heretical  teachers 
had  arisen  in  the  very  bosom  of  the  church,  and 
were  leading  away  the  believers  after  themselves. 
Hymenseus  and  Philetus  were  sowing  in  congenial 
soil  the  seed  which  was  destined  in  another  century 
to  bear  so  ripe  a  crop  of  error.  The  East  and  West 
were  infusing  their  several  elements  of  poison  into 
the  pure  cup  of  Gospel  truth.  In  Asia  Minor,  as  at 
Alexandria,  Hellenic  philosophism  did  not  refuse 
to  blend  with  Oriental  theosophy  ;  the  Jewish  super- 
stitions of  the  Kabbala,  and  the  wild  speculations 
of  the  Persian  Magi,  were  combined  with  the  Greek 
craving  for  an  enlightened  and  esoteric  religion."  ^^ 

At  Ephesus  once  more^  the  Apostle  found  himself 
in  the  midst  of  a  mighty  conflict  with  error.  Like 
a  mighty  flood  heresy  was  sweeping  over  that  whole 
region.  No  corner  of  the  earth  has  been  more  fruit- 
ful of  heretical  ideas  than  Asia  Minor  was.  We  may 
be  sure  that  the  great  champion  of  a  pure  and  un- 

^^Conybeare  and  Howson's  St.  Paul,  Vol.  II.,  p.  447. 


THE  PASTORAL  EPISTLES.  203 

trammeled  Gospel  waged  a  valiant  fight  with  the 
heresiarchs.  Presently  he  was  called  to  Macedonia 
by  some  sudden  necessity  (i  Tim.  i  :  3).  When  he 
arrived  there  he  found  that  his  return  to  Ephesus 
was  likely  to  be  somewhat  delayed,  and  having  left 
Timothy  in  charge  of  the  Ephesian  church,  he  felt 
the  need  of  communicating  with  him,  and  accord- 
ingly he  wrote  from  Macedonia  his  First  Epistle  to 
his  beloved  son  Timothy.  As  soon  as  his  business 
in  Macedonia  was  finished,  he  hastened  back  to 
Ephesus  in  accordance  with  his  plan  (i  Tim.  4:  13). 
Presently  he  had  another  journey  to  make,  and  that 
was  to  Crete.  On  that  island,  disturbances  had 
arisen  that  demanded  his  presence.  For  some  rea- 
son he  was  not  able  to  finish  all  that  needed  to  be 
done,  so  he  left  Titus  in  charge  and  returned  to 
Ephesus.  Planning  to  spend  the  following  Winter 
(that  of  6^  A.  D.)  at  Nicopolis  in  Epirus,  he  wrote 
his  Epistle  to  Titus  on  the  eve  of  his  departure. 
From  Ephesus  Paul  went  to  Miletus,  where  he  was 
compelled  to  leave  Trophimus  on  account  of  sick- 
ness (2  Tim.  4  :  20).  From  thence  he  passed  on  to 
Corinth  where  Erastus  remained,  as  it  was  his  home. 
From  Corinth  the  Apostle  went  on  to  Epirus,  where 
it  had  been  his  intention  to  spend  the  Winter.  But 
did  he  remain  there  that  Winter .?  Certainly  not, 
if  the  Winter  of  2  Tim.  4:21  was  the  same  as  that 
of  Titus  3  :  12.  My  belief  is  that  Paul  did  not  re- 
main as  he  intended  at  Nicopolis  throughout  the 
Winter  of  6j-6%  A.  D.  He  probably  remained  for 
a  short  time,  for  in  2  Tim.  4:10  he  informs  us  that 
Titus  had  gone  unto  Dalmatia.  From  this  I  infer 
that  Titus  found  the  Apostle  at  Nicopolis,  and  was 


204  THE  PAULINE  EPISTLES. 

sent  from  there  on  up  to  Dalmatia  soon  after  his 
arrival.  Some  believe  that  Paul  was  arrested  at 
Nicopolis  and  from  thence  taken  to  Rome  for  his 
second  imprisonment.  But  when  did  he  leave  his 
cloak  at  Troas  with  the  book  and  the  parchments 
(2  Tim.  4:  13) .?  Some  think  his  course  from  Ephe- 
sus  was  to  Miletus,  thence  to  Troas,  thence  to  Cor- 
inth, and  thence  to  Nicopolis.  But  why  should  he 
go  from  Miletus  to  Corinth  by  such  a  round-about 
way  as  Troas }  I  think  it  far  more  probable  that, 
perceiving  that  his  remaining  at  Nicopolis  was 
fraught  with  danger,  he  remained  there  but  a  short 
time,  and  hurrying  across  Macedonia,  he  came  to 
Troas.  Something  led  him  to  venture  down  to 
Ephesus  for  a  short  visit — so  short  a  visit  did  he 
expect  to  make  that  he  left  his  cloak,  books,  and 
parchments  at  Troas  —  intending  to  return  there. 
But  his  time  had  come,  and  at  the  instigation  of 
Alexander  the  coppersmith  he  was  arrested  and  so 
hurriedly  taken  to  Rome  that  he  could  not  get  the 
articles  he  had  left  at  Troas.^*' 

Of  course  this  scheme  is  largely  conjectural,  but 
after  long  and  careful  study  I  am  led  to  suggest 
this  as  a  possible  outline  of  the  movements  of  the 
Apostle  between  his  two  Roman  imprisonments. 

A  great  deal  has  been  written  concerning  the 
marked  peculiarities  in  style  and  matter  of  these 
compared  with  his  other  letters.  These  differences 
have    been    made    the    basis    of   attacks    upon    the 

^*>  Whether  this  Alexander  was  one  of  the  leaders  in  the  Ephesian 
riot  (Acts  19  :  33),  or  the  person  Paul  excommunicated  (i  Tim,  I  :  20), 
we  have  no  means  of  telling  ;  but  I  conjecture  that  he  was  the  same  as 
the  latter,  and  that  he  took  this  means  of  retaliating. 


FIRST  TIMOTHY,  205 

genuineness  of  these  Epistles.  But  the  differences 
can  readily  be  accounted  for  on  the  basis  of  their 
objects  and  the  circumstances  that  led  to  their 
composition.  "The  other  Epistles  afford  us  all 
needful  instruction  respecting  the  great  dogmatic 
truths  of  Christianity,  and  the  chief  points  of  Chris- 
tian morals.  But  respecting  the  practical  organiza- 
tion and  government  of  the  Church,  they  furnish 
only  incidental  hints.  The  deficiency  is  supplied 
by  these  three  Epistles."  And  just  as  the  Gospel 
according  to  John  is  a  fitting  capstone  to  the  Gos- 
pel history  presented  in  the  Synoptics,  so  these 
Pastoral  Epistles  in  their  place  furnish  a  necessary 
climax  to  the  Pauline  Epistles  as  a  whole. 

Taking  up  these  Epistles  in  their  chronological 
order,  they  will  now  be  studied. 

XI.   THE   FIRST   EPISTLE   TO  TIMOTHY. 

/.  Canonicity. 

Clement  of  Rome  (96),  and  Barnabas  (106)  can  be 
cited  as  doubtless  having  had  this  Epistle  in  their 
hands,  although  they  do  not  formally  quote  it. 
Polycarp  (116)  manifestly  quotes  it.  The  Epistle 
to  Diognetus  (117),  and  the  Testaments  of  the 
Twelve  Patriarchs  (120),  show  their  dependence  on 
it.  The  Apology  of  Aristides  (138-161)  contains  a 
possible  quotation  of  i  :  8.®^  An  expression  of  Hege- 
sippus  (173)  likewise  evinces  his  acquaintance  with 
its  language.  Irenaeus  (175),  Tertullian  (190),  and 
Clement  of  Alexandria  (195)  formally  quote  it  by 
name.  Marcion  (130)  omitted  it  from  his  catalogue, 
w  The  Apology  of  Aristides,  by  J.  Rendel  Harris. 


206  THE  PAULINE  EPISTLES. 

and  Tatian  (150)  rejected  it,  but  the  reason  for  this 
is  unquestionably  because  it  controverts  the  very- 
heresy  of  which  they  were  defenders  in  their  day. 
It  is  contained  in  the  Muratori  Canon  (i/o),  as  well 
as  in  the  Syriac  (160)  and  Old  Latin  (170)  Versions. 
Professor  Salmon,  speaking  of  the  Pastoral  Epistles, 
says,  that  '*  if  the  battle  had  to  be  fought  solely  on 
the  ground  of  external  evidence,  they  would  obtain 
a  complete  victory." 

It  is  upon  the  internal  evidence  that  this  Epistle, 
as  well  as  the  other  two,  has  been  most  violently 
assailed.  The  assaults  have  been  made  upon  (i) 
the  basis  of  the  style,  which  is  diverse  from  the 
other  Pauline  Epistles  ;  (2)  the  nature  of  the  heresies 
controverted,  which,  it  is  claimed,  flourished  much 
later  than  Paul's  day  ;  (3)  the  impossibility  of  finding 
a  place  for  them  in  the  life  of  Paul  as  detailed  in  the 
Acts.  In  answering  these  objections,  we  may  re- 
verse their  order,  and  grant  the  force  of  the  third. 
No  place  can  be  found  in  the  Acts  for  these  Epistles, 
for  the  simple  reason  that  they  were  written  later 
than  the  events  recorded  in  the  Acts.  As  to  the 
second  objection,  it  may  be  noted  that  the  assailants 
who  urge  this  are  by  no  means  agreed  among  them- 
selves as  to  the  peculiar  form  of  the  heretical  ideas 
combated.  That  heresy  had  already  arisen,  and  that 
Gnosticism,  which  early  in  the  second  century  at- 
tained a  rank  growth,  was  already  germinating, 
cannot  be  denied.  But  it  can  be,  and  is  denied,  that 
the  Apostle's  words  indicate  that  that  later  devel- 
opment was  already  present.  Wace  affirms  that 
"there  are  no  sufficient  grounds  for  assuming  that 
such   errors  as  St.  Paul  denounces  did  not  exist  at 


FIRST  TIMOTHY,  207 

Ephesus  at  the  time  supposed.  The  utmost  that 
can  be  shown  is  that  errors  akin  to  these,  but,  as  is 
on  all  hands  acknowledged,  by  no  means  identical, 
existed  a  generation  later.  But  this,  so  far  as  it 
goes,  is  rather  a  reason  for  thinking  it  is  probable  that 
the  germs  of  the  same  errors  were  previously  in 
existence,  gradually  changing  their  form  and  becom- 
ing more  developed.  At  any  rate  when  we  know 
so  little  of  the  early  growth  of  Gnosticism,  it  is 
arbitrary  in  the  extreme  to  pronounce  that  the 
form  of  error  described  in  the  Pastoral  Epistles 
could  not  at  the  time  supposed  have  existed  at 
Ephesus."®^  Weiss  also  says  that  ''criticism  itself 
has  plainly  conceded  that  the  delineation  of  doc- 
trinal errors  contained  in  our  Epistle  does  not  har- 
monize with  what  we  know  of  Gnosticism  from 
history."  ^^  As  to  the  first  objection,  that  founded 
on  the  style  of  the  Epistles,  it  should  be  remem- 
bered that  at  least  four  years  separate  them  from 
Philippians.  There  is  no  question  about  the  differ- 
ence in  diction  and  matter  from  the  earlier  Epistles, 
but  this  has  been  exaggerated  by  some  writers. 
But  the  actual  differences  are  readily  explained  "by 
the  peculiar  contents  of  the  Epistles  and  by  the 
entirely  new  phenomena  which  they  oppose."  It 
is  most  arbitrary  to  affirm  that  a  man  with  the 
wealth  and  fertility  of  the  Pauline  intellect  must 
always  use  the  same  forms  of  expression.  Meyer 
exclaims,  *'  How  little  are  such  mechanical  standards 
of  comparison  at  all  compatible  with  a  mind  so  free 
in  movement  and  rich  in   language  as  was  that  of 

62  Bible  Commentary,  Introd.  to  Pastoral  Epistles, 
<53introd.,  Vol.  L,  p.  393. 


208  THE  PAULINE  EPISTLES. 

Paul."  There  is  a  close  affinity  among  these  Pas- 
toral Epistles  to  one  another,  and  the  circumstances 
that  gave  them  birth  readily  account  for  their  differ- 
entiating features. 

The  genuineness  of  these  Epistles  is  also  sup- 
ported by  the  character  of  their  author  as  shown  in 
them.  There  is  the  usual  characteristic  of  humility 
and  self-depreciation,  the  same  anxious  solicitude 
for  those  to  whom  he  writes,  the  same  deep  concern 
for  the  welfare  of  believers.  ^*  The  personal  refer- 
ence to  individuals,  as  well  as  the  minute  acquaint- 
ance with  their  movements  and  condition,  are  such 
as  to  defy  the  act  of  a  forger."  Bishop  EUicott  has 
written,  ''  In  reference  to  the  genuineness  and  au- 
thenticity of  this  Epistle,  with  which  that  of  the 
other  Pastoral  Epistles  is  intimately  connected,  we 
may  briefly  remark,  (a)  that  there  was  never  any 
doubt  entertained  in  the  ancient  Church  that  these 
Epistles  were  written  by  St.  Paul,  and  (b)  that  of  the 
objections  urged  by  modern  skepticism,  the  only  one 
of  any  real  importance  —  the  peculiarities  of  phrases 
and  expressions  —  may  be  so  completely  removed  by 
a  just  consideration  of  the  date  of  the  Epistle,  the 
peculiar  nature  of  the  subjects  discussed,  and  the 
plain,  substantial  accordance  in  all  main  points  with 
the  Apostle's  general  style  (admitted  even  by 
De  Wette),  that  no  doubt  of  the  authorship  ought 
now  to  be  entertained  by  any  calm  and  reasonable 
inquirer."^* 

Thus  looking  at  the  external  and  internal  evi- 
dence, as  well  as  at  the  objections  urged,  we  cannot 
but  conclude  that  the  position  of  these  Epistles 
remains   unaltered.     Beyond   all   doubt    they   came 

6*  Commentary  on  Pastoral  Epistles, 


FIRST  TIMOTHY.  209 

from  Paul's  own  hand.  They  stand  or  fall  together, 
and  surely  we  have  every  reason  to  believe  that 
they  form  a  true  part  of  the  impregnable  rock  of 
Holy  Scripture. 

//.     The  Person  Addressed. 

This  is  Timothy^ajnjidve^f  Ljs^a,^^ 
Eunice  was  a  Jewess  and^  whose  father  was  a  Greek. 
He  was  "doubtless  converted  by  Paul  on  his  first 
missionary  journey  (Acts  i6  :  i).  When  Paul  and 
Silas  came  to  Lystra  on  the  second  missionary 
journey,  they  took  Timothy  with  them.  From 
that  time  forward  he  was  Paul's  constant  compan- 
ion, and  became  bound  to  him  by  many  endearing 
ties.  The  Apostle  frequently  sent  him  on  com- 
missions to  the  Churches,  but  as  a  rule  he  remained 
by  the  side  of  his  spiritual  father.  The  fact  that 
from  youth  Timothy  had  been  instructed  in  the 
Scriptures  (2  Tim.  3:15),  shows  that  his  Jewish 
mother  had  not  neglected  her  duty  to  him.  And 
not  only  did  he  have  a  godly  mother,  but  his  grand- 
mother Lois  was  also  a  woman  of  faith.  This  early 
training  played  no  small  part  in  preparing  Timothy 
for  his  life  work.  He  is  associated  with  Paul  in  the 
salutations  of  the  Epistles  to  the  Thessalonians, 
Colossians,  Philippians,  and  Philemon.  He  was  not 
with  the  Apostle  v/hen  he  went  to  Jerusalem  and 
was  arrested  there,  but  at  Rome  he  evidently 
spent  most  of  his  time  with  Paul.  After  Paul's 
release  from  his  first  Roman  imprisonment,  he  and 
Timothy  traveled  together  to  Ephesus.  It  was  to 
him  as  temporarily,  at  least,  at  the  head  of  the 
Ephesian  Church  that  Paul  wrote  the  two  Epistles. 
14 


210  THE  PAULINE  EPISTLES, 

The  Second  Epistle,  written  when  he  was  a  pris- 
oner the  second  time  at  Rome,  enjoins  him  to  come 
speedily  to  him.  Leaving  the  Church  at  Ephesus 
in  temporary  hands,  Timothy  probably  hastened  to 
Rome  in  obedience  to  Paul's  request,  and  was  able, 
we  may  hope,  to  minister  to  Paul  in  his  last 
hours. 

As  no  reference  is  made  to  Timothy's  father  in 
the  Acts,  except  to  state  that  he  was  a  Greek,  it  has 
been  inferred  that  he  had  died  in  Timothy's  child- 
hood. This  left  the  early  training  of  the  young  man 
in  the  hands  of  his  godly  mother  and  grandmother. 
"  It  would  be  natural  that  a  character  thus  fashioned 
should  retain  throughout  something  of  a  feminine 
piety.  A  constitution  far  from  robust  (i  Tim.  5  :  23), 
a  morbid  shrinking  from  opposition  and  responsi- 
bility (i  Tim.  4:  12-16;  5  :  20,  21  ;  6:  11-14;  2  Tim. 
2  :  1-7),  a  sensitiveness  even  to  tears  (2  Tim.  i  :  4),  a 
tendency  to  ascetic  vigor  which  he  had  not  strength 
to  bear  (i  Tim.  5  :  23),  united,  as  it  often  is,  with  a 
temperament  exposed  to  some  risk  from  "youthful 
lusts"  (2  Tim.  2  :  22),  and  the  softer  emotions  (i  Tim. 
5  :  2),  these  we  may  well  think  of  as  characterizing 
the  youth  as  they  afterwards  characterized  the 
man."^^  The  Apostle  conceived  the  deepest  love  for 
Timothy,  while  Timothy  in  turn  as  a  son  with  a 
father  served  with  Paul  in  the  Gospel  (Phil.  2  :  22). 
If  he  had  not  had  peculiar  qualifications  for  the 
position,  Paul  would  not  have  placed  him  at  the 
head  of  the  Ephesian  Church,  elevating  him  above 
many  who  were  older  than  he.  He  is  referred  to 
repeatedly  as   a   young   man,   but    he    stood   in   the 

^^Plumptre  on  Timothy  in  Smith's  Dictionary  of  the  Bible. 


FIRST  TIMOTHY.  211 

character  of  the  Apostle's  vicar  —  a  position  that 
involved  great  responsibilities.  It  is  not  surprising 
therefore  that  Paul  should  regard  him  in  the  light 
that  he  did.  Tradition  assigns  Timothy  to  the  bish- 
opric of  the  Ephesian  Church  after  Paul's  death, 
and  asserts  that  he  died  a  martyr's  death  late  in 
the  first  century. 

///.    The  Occasio7i  and  Object  of  the  Epistle. 

This  Epistle  was  occasioned  by  the  fact  that  Paul 
had  been  suddenly  called  to  Macedonia,  where  he 
found  he  would  be  delayed  longer  than  he  had  ex- 
pected. Timothy  had  been  left  in  charge  of  the 
Ephesian  Church,  and  Paul  felt  the  necessity  of  com- 
municating with  him  because  of  his  delayed  return 
to  Ephesus.  The  object  of  the  Epistle  was  twofold  ; 
first,  to  exhort  Timothy  to  counteract  the  develop-  \ 
ing  heresies  of  the  time,  and,  secondly,  to  instruct 
him  in  all  the  particulars  of  his  duties  as  overseer  in 
charge  for  the  time  being  of  the  Ephesian  Church. 

IV.   The  OtLtline  of  the  Epistle!'^ 

I.   Salutation,     i  :  i,  2. 

II.   Reminds  Timothy  of  the  exhortation  he  had 
given  him  to  silence  the  false  teachers,     i  :  3-20. 

1.  Personal  charge  to  Timothy,      i  :  3-5. 

2.  Explains  the  evil  nature  of  the  heresy,      i  : 

6-1 1. 
r3!jPersonal  justification  for  assuming  authority 
^        in  this  matter,     i  :  12-17. 
4.  His   choice   of    Timothy   for   his   work,      i  : 
18-20. 

^^This  outline  is  from   Professor  Warfield.     See  Presbyterian  Re- 
view^ October,  1887. 


212  THE  PAULINE  EPISTLES. 

III.  Directions  to  Timothy  to  order  the  Church 
life  in  Ephesus.     2  :  1-4  :  1 1. 

I.  With  reference  to  the  public  worship  of  the 
Church.     2  :  1-15. 
{a^  Duty  of  universal  supplication  explained. 

2  :  1-7. 

(^.)  Proper  manner  in  public  prayer.     2  : 8-10. 

(^.)  General    command    that    women    should 

keep   silence  in  these   services    given, 

^K  and  justified.     2:11-15. 

\       f  2.\With  reference  to  the  choice  of  proper  men 

/        for  official   position   in  the  Church.      3  : 

1-13. 
(^.)  Requirements  for  ordination  of  bishops. 

3  :  1-7- 

(^.)  The  same  of  deacons.     3  :  8-13. 
3.  Importance  of  these  directions  as  to  church 
services  and  officers.     3  :  14-4:  11. 
(^.)  Nature  of  the  Church  as  God's  house  and 

church.     3  :  14,  15. 
(^.)  Function  of  the  Church  as  the  pillar  and 

ground  of  the  truth.     3  :  15,  16. 
(^.)  Danger   impending  over  the  truth  from 
false  teachers.     4:1-11. 

IV.  Personal  exhortations   to    Timothy.      4:12- 
6:2. 

1.  Duty  to  himself  and  his  position.     4:  12-16. 

2.  His   proper  attitude  toward  various  classes. 

5  :  1-6:2. 
(«.)  Old  and  young  of  both  sexes.     5:1,2. 
(^.)  Widows.     5  :  3-16. 
{c.)  Presbyters.     5  :  17-25. 
(^.)  Slaves.     6:1,2, 


FIRST  TIMOTHY.  213 

V.  Concluding  warnings  to  Timothy  against  the 
dangerous  elements  in  the  Church.  6 :  3-19,  in 
which  he 

1.  describes  the  character  of  the  false  teachers, 

6:3-5, 

2.  expounds  the  true  relation  of  godliness  and 

wealth,  6 : 6-10, 

3.  exhorts  Timothy,  6  :  11-16, 

4.  and   through    him  the  rich  members  of  the 

Church,  6 :  17-19. 

5.  Again    exhorts  Timothy   to    keep  the  faith 

and  avoid  error.     6  :  20-21. 

6.  Benediction.     6:21. 

V.  Date  and  Place  of  Composition. 

On  examining  this  Epistle  it  is  evident  that  Paul 
had  been  in  Ephesus  a  short  time  before  it  was 
written  (i  :  3),  that  he  had  been  suddenly  called  to  go 
to  Macedonia,  and  that  he  had  left  Timothy  in 
charge  of  the  Church  during  his  absence.  It  is  also 
manifest  that  Paul  expected  to  return  again  to  Ephe- 
sus before  long,  although  his  return  might  be  delayed 
for  a  time.  When  Paul  left  Ephesus  on  his  third 
missionary  journey  (Acts  20:1,2),  Timothy  had 
been  sent  to  Macedonia  (Acts  19  :  22),  and  to  Corinth 
(i  Cor.  4:17).  And  when  Paul  wrote  Second  Cor- 
inthians from  Macedonia,  Timothy  was  with  him 
(2  Cor.  I  :  i).  From  this  it  can  be  seen  that  the 
events  referred  to  in  this  Epistle  do  not  correspond 
with  the  facts  in  connection  with  the  other  depart- 
ures of  Paul  from  Ephesus.  Nor  catn  we  find  a  place 
for  this  absence  of  Paul  from  Ephesus  during  the  three 
years' residence  (Acts  20:  31)  in  that  city.     There  is 


214  THE  PAULINE  EPISTLES. 

no  place  then  for  the  facts  referred  to  in  this  Epistle 
earlier  than  after  the  release  of  Paul  from  his  first 
Roman  imprisonment.  This  places  as  the  limits  of 
the  time  of  its  composition,  the  summer  of  63  A.  D. , 
and  that  of  68  A.  D.,  when  the  Apostle  was  martyred 
at  Rome.  66  A.  D.  has  been  suggested  as  possibly 
the  date  when  Paul  returned  from  Spain  to  Asia 
Minor.  The  journey  to  Macedonia  was  made  prob- 
ably in  the  summer  of  6^  A.  D.,  and  during  it  this 
Epistle  was  written.  The  postscript  that  it  "  was 
written  from  Laodicea,  which  is  the  chiefest  city  of 
Phrygia  Pacatiana,"  is  therefore  manifestly  incorrect, 
for  the  Epistle  was  written  from  some  point  in 
Macedonia. 

VL  Peculiarities  of  the  Epistle. 

The  First  Epistle  to  Timothy  is  not  merely  a  per- 
sonal letter,  as  Philemon,  or  even  Second  Timothy, 
but  is  an  official  communication  by  the  Apostle  to 
his  vicar  at  Ephesus.  Personal  matters  of  course  are 
touched  upon,  but  they  are  merely  incidental  to  the 
main  purpose  of  the  Epistle.  This  Epistle,  as  well  as 
the  others  of  the  group,  deals  not  so  much  with  doc- 
trine, although  it  emphasizes  the  need  of  sound 
doctrine,  as  it  does  with  matters  that  pertain  to  the 
organization  and  government  of  the  Church.  In  the 
earlier  Epistles  the  doctrinal  foundation  is  laid  for 
the  Church  ;  in  these  Epistles  attention  is  paid  rather 
to  the  superstructure.  *'  The  great  theme  in  these 
Epistles  is  the  application  of  the  Gospel  to  outward 
conduct."  The  special  peculiarity  of  this  group  is 
their  attention  to  the  matter  of  the  Church  govern- 
ment, 


,  TITUS.  215 

XII.   THE   EPISTLE  TO  TITUS. 

/.  Canonicity. 

The  external  testimony  to  this  Epistle  includes 
Clement  of  Rome  (96),  the  Epistle  to  Diognetus 
(117),  Justin  Martyr  (145),  the  heretic  Tatian  (150), 
who  received  this  Epistle  but  rejected  the  two  to 
Timothy,  and  Theophilus  of  Antioch  (168).  The 
Muratori  Canon  (170),  the  Syriac  (160)  and  Old  Latin 
(170)  Versions  contain  it.  Irenaeus  (175),  Tertullian 
(190),  and  Clement  of  Alexandria  (195), —  all  of  these 
quote  it  by  name,  ascribing  it  to  Paul.  The  internal 
evidence  in  regard  to  these  Pastoral  Epistles  has 
already  been  examined  under  First  Timothy.  It  is 
worthy  of  note  that  a  number  of  critics  who  reject 
First  Timothy,  acknowledge  Titus  and  Second  Timo- 
thy to  be  Pauline.  And  there  are  none  who  accept 
either,  or  both  of  the  Epistles  to  Timothy,  who  do 
not  also  accept  Titus  as  well.  Combining  all  this 
evidence  with  the  claim  of  the  Epistle  itself,  we  may 
rest  satisfied  that  it  is  a  genuine  Epistle  of  Paul. 

//.  The  Per s 071  Addressed. 

Tituvto  whom  this  Epistle  is  addressed,  is  no- 
where mentioned  by  name  in  the  Acts,  and  all  that 
we  can  learn  of  him  must  be  gathered  from  the  inci- 
dental allusions  to  him  in  Paul's  Epistles.  He  \y33.^ 
Gentye^ieixi^.J.,i^reek^.J^^  When 

Paul  and  Barnabas  were  appointed  by  the  Antiochian 
Church  to  go  up  to  Jerusalem  to  consult  with  the 
Apostles  and  elders  there  concerning  the  controversy 
that  had  arisen  regarding  circumcision  (Acts  15:2), 
Titus  accompanied  them  (Gal.  2  :  i).    In  regard  to  hiiu 


216  THE  PAULINE  EPISTLES. 

Paul  took  a  decided  stand,  and  would  not  permit  his 
circumcision  because  he  was  a  Gentile, —  the  point  at 
issue  being  the  relation  of  the  Gentiles  to  the  law. 
The  expression  "  mine  own  son  after  the  common 
faith,"  shows  that  he  was  a  convert  of  Paul's.  He 
became  a  Christian  before  the  Council  of  Jerusalem 
in  50  A.  D.  The  next  time  he  appears  in  the  history 
is  in  connection  with  the  Corinthian  church.  Paul 
calls  him  his  "partner  and  fellow-helper,"  indicating 
that  they  had  become  closely  associated  in  their 
work.  Titus  was  the  bearer  of  the  First  Epistle  to 
the  Corinthians  in  the  Spring  of  the  year  57  A.  D. 
Shortly  after  his  departure  on  that  errand,  Paul  also 
left  Ephesus  and  went  to  Troas,  where  he  had  hoped 
to  meet  Titus  on  his  return  from  Corinth  with  a  re- 
port of  the  reception  of  that  Epistle  (2  Cor.  2:13). 
Not  meeting  him  there,  the  Apostle  in  his  great  anx- 
iety to  hear  the  news,  pressed  on  into  Macedonia, 
where  at  some  point  Titus  met  him  and  gave  him  a 
full  account  of  the  effect  of  the  First  Epistle  on  the 
Corinthians  (2  Cor.  7  :  6).  Immediately  Paul  wrote 
his  Second  Epistle  to  the  same- people,  and  sent 
Titus  back  with  it  at  his  own  request,  authorizing 
him  at  the  same  time  to  complete  the  collection  for 
the  benefit  of  the  poor  saints  at  Jerusalem,  which  on 
his  previous  visit  Titus  had  begun,  and  which  seems 
to  have  been  somewhat  under  his  care  (2  Cor.  8  : 6, 
16,  17). 

From  that  time  on  (Summer  of  57  A.  D.),  Titus 
does  not  appear  in  the  history  at  all  until  some  years 
after  the  release  of  Paul  from  his  first  imprisonment 
in  Rome.  It  was  possibly  the  Summer  of  6j  A.  D. 
when   Paul  took  Titus  with   him   to   the   island   of 


TITUS.  217 

Crete,  where  his  presence  was  needed  to  reform  the 
abuses  that  had  arisen  among  the  Christians  on  that 
island.  The  Apostle  was  accompanied  by  Titus,  but 
it  is  apparent  that  he  was  for  some  reason  unable  to 
remain  long  enough  in  Crete  to  complete  the  work  that 
it  was  necessary  to  accomplish,  and  consequently 
he  left  Titus  behind  him  to  complete  that  which  he 
had  been  compelled  to  leave  in  an  unfinished  con- 
dition. That  Titus'  stay  in  Crete  was  to  be  only 
temporary  is  clearly  proven  by  the  directions  Paul 
sends  to  him  to  join  him  as  soon  as  possible  at 
Nicopolis  in  Epirus,  where  Paul  was  then  expecting 
to  spend  the  following  Winter.  In  this  Epistle  he  is 
enjoined  to  hasten  to  Paul  just  as  soon  as  Artemas  or 
Tychicus  should  come  to  Crete  to  take  his  place.  In 
2  Tim.  4  :  lo  Paul  wrote,  ''Titus  is  departed  to  Dal- 
matia,"  and  from  this  we  infer  that  he  had  joined  Paul 
at  Nicopolis,  and  from  thence  he  had  been  sent  on 
some  mission  up  into  Dalmatia.  This  is  the  last 
reference  we  have  to  this  consecrated  worker  for 
Christ. 

In  comparison  with  Timothy,  we  may  infer  from 
the  duties  laid  upon  Titus,  that  he  was  the  more 
energetic  and  stronger  character  of  the  two.  2  Cor. 
12  :  i8  contains  an  implied  assertion  of  the  strict 
integrity  of  Titus.  The  delicate  and  difficult  mission 
that  was  his  in  connection  with  the  delivery  of  the 
First  Epistle  to  the  Corinthians  gives  evidence  of 
Paul's  high  estimate  of  his  ability  to  rebuke  the 
abuses  that  had  arisen  there.  In  it  he  was  quite 
successful  (2  Cor.  7  :  7,  15).  He  was  a  man  of  great 
zeal  and  sympathy,  grieving  over  what  was  evil  and 
rejoicing   over  what  was    good    (2  Cor.  7:7,  13,  15). 


218  THE  PAULINE  EPISTLES. 

In  regard  to  the  duties  imposed  on  him  in  reforming 
the  abuses  in  Crete  and  in  appointing  elders  and 
completing  the  organization  of  the  churches  there, 
"  we  see  not  only  the  confidence  reposed  in  him  by 
the  Apostle,  but  the  need  there  was  of  determination 
and  strength  of  purpose,  and  therefore  the  proba- 
bility that  this  was  his  character."  Tradition  makes 
Titus  the  first  Bishop  of  Crete,  but  this  does  not 
harmonize  with  the  manifestly  temporary  character 
of  his  work  on  that  island.  His  duty  was  to  com- 
plete the  work  begun  by  Paul  and  then  hasten  to  the 
Apostle. 

The  island  of  Crete  is  one  of  the  largest  of  the 
islands  of  the  Mediterranean.  Upon  it  a  great 
many  Jews  resided.  "  The  character  which  the 
Apostle  gives  of  the  Cretans  is  far  from  being  com- 
plimentary. He  quotes  the  words  of  one  of  their 
own  poets,  and  asserts  that  this  testimony  was  true  : 
'  The  Cretans  are  always  liars,  evil  beasts,  slow 
bellies.'  This  testimony  is  abundantly  corroborated 
by  similar  assertions  from  ancient  writers."  That 
Christianity  had  penetrated  this  island  some  time 
previous  to  Paul's  visit  is  evident.  Cretans  were  in 
Jerusalem  at  the  time  of  the  great  Pentecostal  out- 
pouring of  the  Holy  Spirit,  and  on  their  return  home 
they  must  have  carried  the  truth  with  them.  The 
organization  of  their  churches  was  incomplete,  and 
they  probably  had  never  had  any  apostolic  super- 
vision until  Paul  came  to  them.  The  heresies  as- 
sailed in  this  Epistle  were  of  Jewish  and  not  of 
Gnostic  origin.  Paul  touched  at  this  island  on  his 
way  to  Rome  as  a  prisoner  in  60  A.  D.,  but  his  stay 


TITUS.  219 

was  so  short  that  he  very  probably  had  no  personal 
contact  with  the  Christians  there.  Huther  describes 
the  heretics  referred  to  in  the  Epistle  in  the  follow- 
ing words:  ''The  heretics  (1:9)  belong  especially 
to  Judaism  (i  :  10).  While  boasting  of  their  special 
knowledge  of  God,  they  lead  a  godless  life  (i  :  16), 
condemned  by  their  own  consciences  (3  :  11).  What 
they  bring  forward  are  Jewish  myths  (i  :  14),  gene- 
alogies, points  of  controversy  about  the  law  (3  :  9), 
and  mere  commandments  of  man  (i  :  14).  They  are 
idle  babblers  (i  :  10),  who  with  their  shameful  doc- 
trine (i  :  11)  seduce  hearts  (i  :  10),  cause  divisions 
in  the  church  (3  :  10),  and  draw  whole  families  into 
destruction  (i  :  11);  and  all  this  —  for  the  sake  of 
shameful  gain"  (i  :  11)." 

///.    TJie  Occasion  and  Object  of  the  Epistle. 

Paul  desired  to  give  Titus  some  further  instruc- 
tion in  regard  to  his  superintendency  of  the  Cretan 
churches,  as  well  as  to  summon  him  to  Nicopolis. 
The  Apostle's  design  in  writing,  therefore,  was 
principally  to  giye^  instruction  in  regard  to  the  se- 
lection and  appointments  of  office-bearers.  Another 
design  was  '*  to  instruct  and  charge  Titus  to  re- 
fute and  oppose  false  teachers.  It  is  more  than 
probable  that  Titus  had  met  with  much  opposition  ; 
several  despised  him,  and  others  openly  attacked 
him.  PauJ^  t  h  ere  for  e  ^  b  y.,this  F.pistk,  ia¥£sts.Jum 
w]th_Jns_apostolic  authority,  and  commands  him  to 
exhort  and  convince  gainsayers,  to  stop,  tLe  mouths 
of  vain  talkers  and  deceivers,  to  rebuke  them 
"'Huther  in  Meyer's  Commentary  on  the  Pastoral  Epistles. 


220  THE  PAULINE  EPISTLES. 

sharply,   and   to   reject   heretics,  if  not   brought  to 
repentance  after  two  admonitions."^^ 

IV.  Outline  of  the  Epistle. 

1.  Salutation,     i  :  1-4. 

2.  His  purpose  in  leaving  Titus  at  Crete,      i  :  5)  6- 
0)  Qualifications  of  bishops,     i  '.7-9. 

4.  Necessity  for  these  qualifications,     i  :  10. 

5.  Description  of  the  false  teachers,     i  :  11-16. 

6.  Special  rules  for  various  classes.     2  :  1-15. 
(i.)  The  old  and  young.     2  :  1-6. 

(2.)  Exhortation  to  Titus  that  he  should  be  a 
pattern  of  all  good  works.     2  :  7,  8. 

(3.)  Slaves.     2  :  9,  10. 

(4.)  Basis  for  these  rules  found  in  the  purpose 
of  the  work  of  Christ.     2  :  11-15. 

7.  Sundry  commands  to  Christians.     3  :  1-8. 
(i.)  To  be  subject  to  their  rulers.     3  :  i. 

(2.)  To  be  gentle  and  kind  to  all  men,  because 
this  is  in  keeping  with  God's  purpose  in 
them.     3  : 2-8. 

8.  Injunctions  to  Titus.     3  :  9-1 1. 

(i.)  To  avoid  useless  disputes.     3:9. 
(2.)  To   excommunicate   determined    errorists. 
3:  10,  II. 

9.  Concluding  instructions  and  benediction.      3  : 
12-15. 

V.  Date  and  Place  of  Composition. 

The  data  furnished  by  this  Epistle  itself  which 
help  to  determine  this  question  are  :  the  Apostle  had 
shortly  before  its  composition  been  on  the  island  of 
Crete,  where  upon  his   departure  he  had  left  Titus ; 

^^Gloag's  Introd.    to  the  Pauline  Epistles,  p.  416. 


TITUS.  221 

and  it  was  his  expectation  to  spend  the  following 
Winter  at  Nicopolis,  in  Epirus.  Attempts  have  been 
made  to  find  a  place  for  this  trip  and  for  the  compo- 
sition of  this  Epistle  during  the  three  years  spent  at 
Ephesus,  54-57  A.  D.  But  it  is  to  be  noted  that 
the  great  dissimilarity  between  this  Epistle  and  the 
acknowledged  Epistles  of  that  period  is  positively 
against  this  idea.  The  earlier  Epistles  have  nothing 
to  say  directly  about  the  qualifications  of  church  offi- 
cers, or  concerning  matters  that  pertain  to  the  or- 
ganization and  government  of  the  Church.  This 
feature  alone  would  forbid  the  early  date  assigned 
by  some  to  this  Epistle.  But  it  may  also  be  asked, 
When  during  the  Ephesian  residence  had  Paul  any 
idea  of  spending  the  following  Winter  at  Nicopolis? 
He  expected  to  spend  the  Winter  of  57-58  A.  D.  at 
Corinth  (i  Cor.  16  :  6  ;  Acts  20  :  1-3),  but  no  refer- 
ence is  made  in  either  the  Acts  or  the  Epistles  of 
that  earlier  period  to  any  expectation  of  spending  a 
Winter  at  Nicopolis.  There  is  no  place  in  the  Acts 
for  the  composition  of  this  Epistle,  for  it  comes 
several  years  later. 

First  Timothy  has  already  been  dated  during  the 
early  Summer  of  6^  A.  D.  Leaving  Titus  at  Crete, 
the  Apostle  returned  to  Ephesus  in  the  latter  part 
of  the  same  season.  This  Epistle  was  written  before 
the  following  Winter  set  in,  and  either  at  Ephesus  or 
else  on  the  way  to  Nicopolis.  The  postscript  in  the 
English  Bible  affirms  that  it  was  written  from  Nicop- 
olis of  Macedonia.  But  this  is  certainly  incorrect, 
for  the  Apostle  does  not  seem  to  have  reached  his 
objective  point  when  he  wrote  this  Epistle.  He 
may  have  been  en  route^  but  it  is  very  probable  that 


222  THE  PAULINE  EPISTLES. 

he  would  have  mentioned  the  fact  of  his  arrival  at  his 
journey's  end,  if  he  had  actually  reached  that  point. 
The  date  of  this  Epistle  accordingly  is  the  Fall  of 
67  A.  D.,  and  the  place  of  its  composition  was  prob- 
ably the  city  of  Ephesus,  or  possibly  at  some  point 
between  there  and  the  Nicopolis  to  which  the  Apos- 
tle was  going.  Of  all  the  places  named  Nicopolis, 
and  there  were  at  least  seven  of  them,  the  Nicopolis 
in  Epirus  is  the  one  which  the  large  majority  of 
scholars  have  settled  upon  as  the  one  named  by 
Paul. 

As  Paul  speaks  in  2  Tim.  4:12  of  having  sent 
Tychicus  (or  of  sending  him)  to  Ephesus,  we  may 
doubtless  infer  that  Artemas  was  the  person  whom 
he  eventually  chose  to  occupy  Titus'  place  in 
Crete  (Titus  3  :  12).  It  has  been  inferred  that  Zenas 
and  Apollos  mentioned  in  3  :  13  were  the  bearers  of 
this  Epistle  to  its  destination,  but  it  seems  rather 
that  they  were  with  Titus  when  this  letter  was 
written.  Artemas  may  have  been  the  bearer  of 
the  Epistle,  although  we  are  not  able  to  affirm 
this  absolutely. 

XIII.   THE   SECOND   EPISTLE   TO   TIMOTHY. 

/.   Canonicity. 

Barnabas  (106),  Ignatius  (115),  and  Polycarp  (116) 
most  certainly  adopt  certain  phrases  from  this  Epistle. 
Heracleon  (150)  refers  to  a  passage  in  it.  It  is  con- 
tained in  the  Muratori  Canon  (170),  as  well  as  in  the 
Syriac  (160)  and  Old  Latin  (170)  Versions.  Irenaeus 
(175),  Tertullian  (190),  and  Clement  of  Alexandria 
(195)  quote  it  by  name.      This  external  evidence  is 


SECOND    TIMOTHY.  223 

SO  strong  that  many  who  reject  First  Timothy  accept 
this  Epistle.  There  are  comparatively  few  critics  in 
modern  times  who  reject  it.  In  regard  to  the  in- 
ternal evidence,  Professor  Salmon  writes,  **  In  the 
case  of  the  Second  Epistle  to  Timothy,  the  marks 
of  Pauline  origin  are  so  strong  that  I  do  not  think 
that  any  Epistle  can  with  more  confidence  be  as- 
serted to  be  the  Apostle's  work."  ^^  Reuss  affirms 
that  "of  all  the  Pauline  Epistles  which  criticism  has 
attacked,  none  (save  that  to  Philemon)  bears  the 
stamp  of  genuineness  so  plainly  as  this,  provided 
one  keeps  in  mind  the  circumstances  under  which 
it  must  have  been  written." ''^  And  the  same  critic 
also  writes  that  ''  the  whole  Epistle  is  so  completely 
the  natural  expression  of  the  actual  situation  of  the 
author,  and  contains,  unsought  and  for  the  most  part 
in  the  form  of  mere  allusions,  such  a  mass  of  minute 
and  unessential  particulars,  that  even  did  the  name 
of  the  writer  not  chance  to  be  mentioned  at  the  be- 
ginning it  would  be  easy  to  discover  it."^** 

The  style  of  the  Epistle,  as  well  as  its  historical 
references  and  allusions,  proclaim  its  genuineness. 
None  but  Paul  himself  could  possibly  have  written 
it,  for  Paul  is  the  only  one  who  could  have  been 
so  intimately  acquainted  with  the  persons  named  in 
the  letter  as  to  have  described  their  conditions  and 
movements.  ''Genuineness  is  stamped  upon  the 
letter  throughout,  so  clearly  and  unmistakably  that 
we  cannot  for  a  moment  entertain  the  idea  of  its 
being  a  forgery." 

69  Salmon's  Introd.  to  the  N.  T.,  p.  503. 

70  Reuss'  History  of  the  N.  T.,  Vol.  I.,  p.  12 1. 


224  THE  PAULINE  EPISTLES. 

II.    The  Occasion  and  Object  of  the  Epistle, 

When  the  Apostle  wrote  this  Epistle,  he  was  in 
prison  in  Rome  for  the  second  time.  His  confine- 
ment during  his  first  imprisonment  had  not  been  as 
severe,  for  although  he  was  then  chained  all  the  time 
to  a  Roman  soldier,  he  had  been  permitted  to  dwell 
in  his  own  hired  house,  where  those  who  desired  to  see 
him  could  have  access  to  him  at  any  time.  But  now 
he  is  kept  under  close  surveillance  in  some  prison,  so 
that  when  Onesiphorus  came  to  Rome,  he  had  to 
search  diligently  for  the  Apostle  before  he  found 
him  (2  Tim.  i  :  16-18).  Formerly  he  had  been  sur- 
rounded by  friends  and  workers,  who  had  unre- 
stricted approach  to  him  ;  but  now  he  is  practically 
alone,  with  the  exception  of  the  faithful,  beloved 
physician  Luke,  who  would  not  desert  him  even 
though  his  condition  was  so  much  changed  from  what 
it  had  been.  Titus  and  Crescens  are  absent  on  duty 
(4 :  10).  The  allusion  to  Tychicus  is  a  little  obscure, 
and  may  mean  that  he  is  absent  also,  or,  as  some  main- 
tain, he  is  sending  this  Epistle  by  his  hand.'^^  Demas 
had  deserted  the  Apostle,  and  Paul  reminds  Timothy 
that,  as  he  knew,  "  all  that  are  in  Asia  turned  away 
from  me"  (2  Tim.  i  :  15,  R.  V.),  doubtless  meaning 
that  at  the  time  of  his  arrest  either  at  Troas  or  at 
Ephesus,  they  had  deserted  him.  The  Apostle,  there- 
fore, feels  his  position  keenly,  the  defections  having 
made  the  confinement  all  the  harder  to  bear. 

Paul  also  informs  Timothy,  "At  my  first  defense  no 
man  took  my  part,  but  all  forsook  me  "  (2  Tim.  4  :  16). 

■^^The  epistolary  aorist  is  probably  used  here,  and  it  means,  "  An4 
Tychicus  I  am  sending  (or,  \  send  herewith)  to  Ephesus." 


SECOND    TIMOTHY.  225 

The  reference  here  is  in  all  probability  to  his  first 
preliminary  trial,  when  he  was  delivered  from  the  lion's 
mouth.  "He  was  acquitted, then,  on  the  first  charge 
of  the  indictment,  which  perhaps  accused  him  of  con- 
spiring with  the  incendiaries  of  Rome.  He  was  de- 
livered from  the  immediate  peril,  and  saved  from  the 
ignominious  and  painful  death  which  might  have 
been  his  doom  had  he  been  convicted  on  such  a 
charge."  Paul  had  been  remanded  to  prison  to 
await  his  final  trial.  In  that  approaching  trial  he  evi- 
dently does  not  expect  acquittal,  for  he  writes,  ''  I  am 
now  ready  to  be  offered,  and  the  time  of  my  depart- 
ure is  at  hand  "  (2  Tim.  4  :  6). 

How  natural  that  he  should  desire  to  see  Timo- 
thy once  more  ere  death  should  come  to  his  release  ! 
So  he  writes  to  Timothy  to  hasten  to  him,  urging 
him  to  come  before  another  Winter  should  set  in.'^^ 
He  also  enjoins  him  to  bring  Mark,  for  by  his 
faithfulness  Mark  had  restored  himself  fully  to 
Paul's  favor  and  confidence,  both  of  which  he  had 
forfeited  by  his  deserting  the  Apostle  on  the  first 
missionary  journey  (Acts  15  138).  Timothy  is  also 
to  bring  the  cloak,  books,  and  parchments  the 
Apostle  had  left  at  Troas.  '*  As,  however,  his  fate 
was  uncertain,  and  as  he  might  not  survive  until  the 
arrival  of  Timothy,  he  writes  this  Epistle  with  a 
view  to  stir  up  and  encourage  that  Evangelist  in  his 
ministry  ;  he  exhorts  him  not  to  be  ashamed  of  the 
Gospel  of  Christ,  to  stand   up  boldly  for  the  faith, 

72  The  winter  of  2  Tim.  4:21!  now  believe  was  the  same  as  that  of  Titus 
3:12.  This  necessitates  dating  2  Timothy  in  67  A.  D,,  and  not  in  68  A.  D., 
as  held  in  my  first  edition. 


15 


226  THE  PAULINE  EPISTLES. 

and  to  endure  hardship  as  a  good  soldier  of  Jesus 
Christ,  and  he  warns  him  against  these  false  teach- 
ers, who  were  perverting  the  minds  of  the  disciples, 
eating  as  a  canker  into  the  very  heart  of  religion. 
This  Epistle,  then,  is  a  pastoral  charge  of  the  great 
Apostle  of  the  Gentiles,  primarily  designed  for 
Timothy,  but  applicable  to  all  ministers  and  to  all 
congregations  in  the  Christian  Church.  "^^ 

///.  Contents  of  the  Epistle. 

This  is  a  private  letter,  and  not  like  the  first,  an 
official  communication.  As  such  it  partakes  of  the 
freedom  of  a  private  and  personal  letter.  It  does 
not  admit  of  formal  divisions. 

1.  Greeting.     1:1,2. 

2.  Thanksgiving.     1:3-5. 

3.  Exhortation    to  steadfastness    in  the    Gospel. 

I  16-14. 

4.  The  kindness  of  Onesiphorus.     i  :  15-18. 

5.  Continued  exhortations  and  rules  for  conduct. 

2 : 1-26. 

6.  Warnings  against  false  teachers.     3  :  1-13. 

7.  Again  urges  Timothy  to  be  steadfast,  and  to 

live  according  to  the  inspired  Scriptures,  with 
description    of  the    uses    of  the    Scriptures. 

3 : 14-17- 

8.  A  solemn  charge,  with  prophecy  of  the  future 

developments  of  heresy.     4:1-5. 

9.  Personal  details.     4:6-22. 

(^.)  Consciousness     of    approaching     death. 

4 :6-8. 
(^.)  Commands  Timothy   to  hasten    to   him, 

4:9- 

^^Gloag's  Introcl,  to  the  Pauline  Epistles,  p.  42O, 


SECOND   TIMOTHY.  227 

{c.)  Paul's  loneliness  consequent  on  the  de- 
sertions of  some,  and  the  absence  of 
others  on  duty.     4  :  10-15. 

(^.)  Results   of  his   first   trial.     4:  16-18. 

(e.)  Salutations    and    benediction.     4:19-22. 

IV.  Date  and  Place  of  Composition. 

Concerning  the  place  of  composition,  none  can 
deny  that  it  was  Romp.  It  is  manifestly  the  last 
Epistle  written  by  the  aged  Apostle.  It  could  not 
have  been  written  during  the  first  imprisonment,  for 
when  he  wrote  to  the  Philippians,  he  expected  to  be 
released  and  to  see  them  soon  again  ;  but  now  as  he 
writes,  the  only  release  he  expects  is  that  of  death. 
What  has  already  been  written  concerning  the  date 
of  the  other  two  Pastoral  Epistles  confirms  our  be- 
lief that  this  Epistle  was  written  near  the  end  of 
Paul's  life  and  during  his  second  imprisonment.  All 
the  references  in  this  Epistle  to  his  imprisonment 
show  that  he  is  in  a  very  different  position  than  he 
was  during  his  former  imprisonment. 

When  he  wrote  the  Epistle  to  Titus  he  was  proba- 
bly at  Ephesus.  Leaving  there  in  the  Fall  of  6^  A.  D. , 
he  journeyed  to  Nicopolis.  His  expected  sojourn 
there  for  that  Winter  was  cut  short  by  apparent 
dangers.  Leaving  Nicopolis,  he  fled  across  Mace- 
donia to  Troas,  at  which  point,  or  possibly  after  he 
had  arrived  at  Ephesus  from  Troas,  he  was  appre- 
hended and  taken  with  all  haste  to  Rome."^*  Since  the 
burning  of  Rome  in  64  A.  D.,  all  Christians  were  lia- 
ble to  arrest  at  any  moment.     Informers  (delatores) 

'*  Conybeare  and  Howson  believe  that  at  this  point  he  was  arrested 
and  taken  to  Rome,  that  he  had  left  the  articles  at  Troas,  mentioned  in 
4  :  13,  when  he  returned   from   Macedonia   to  Ephesus  after    writing 


228  THE  PAULINE  EPISTLES. 

were  encouraged  to  bring  charges  of  any  kind 
against  Christians,  and  credence  was  readily  given 
to  any  information  against  them.  It  may  be  that 
Alexander  the  coppersmith  (4 :  14)  was  the  one  at 
whose  accusation  he  was  arrested.  This  man  may 
have  been  the  Alexander  whose  excommunication 
he  had  secured  (i  Tim.  i  :  20),  and  who  took  this  way 
of  revenge.  At  Rome  the  Apostle  was  incarcerated 
in  a  chill  and  gloomy  prison.  And  when  he  wrote 
his  Epistle,  he  had  had  his  first  preliminary  trial. 
Taking  all  these  things  into  consideration,  the 
most  probable  date  for  this  Epistle  is  in  the  Fall 
of  67  A.D.  Probably  before  the  next  Spring  his  final 
trial  came  up.  The  noble  Apostle  to  the  Gentiles 
was  condemned,  and  he  was  accorded  the  death  of  a 
Roman  citizen,  that  of  beheading.  With  calm  and 
exultant  faith  he  looks  forward  to  his  release  from 
the  burdens  and  cares  of  this  life.  "  I  have  fought  a 
good  fight,  I  have  finished  my  course,  I  have  kept 
the  faith  ;  henceforth  there  is  laid  up  for  me  a  crown 
of  righteousness,  which  the  Lord,  the  righteous  Judge, 
shall  give  me  at  that  day."  On  some  day  in  May, 
68  A.  D.,  according  to  tradition,  the  Apostle  was  led 
outside  of  the  eternal  city  on  the  Ostian  road,  and 
beheaded.     Thus  he  departed  and  was  with  Christ. 

V.  Peculiarities  of  the  Epistle, 

The  peculiar  characteristic  of  this  Epistle  is  that 
It  was  the  last  one  of  the  great  Apostle.     It  is  his 

I  Tim.  With  this  I  cannot  agree,  for  I  do  not  think  he  was  likely  to 
have  left  these  articles  that  he  valued  so  much  there  for  almost  a  year 
without  having  sent  for  them.  It  seems  to  me  that  he  had  left  them 
there  only  a  few  weeks  before  he  wrote  this  Epistle, 


SECOND   TIMOTHY.  229 

dying  advice,  written  in  the  face  of  impending  mar- 
tyrdom. Nowhere  does  his  noble  manhood  stand 
forth  in  clearer  light  than  here.  What  pathos,  what 
faith,  what  courage,  what  hope,  shine  forth  in  every 
line  of  his  imperishable  letter  !  "  He  looked  forward 
calmly  to  the  grave,  and,  with  the  executioner's  ax 
in  the  foreground,  he  pens  this  letter  to  his  favorite 
disciple  ;  he  solemnly  charges  him  before  God  and 
the  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  who  shall  judge  the  quick  and 
the  dead  at  His  appearing  and  His  kingdom,  to  be 
faithful  to  the  charge  committed  to  him  (2  Tim. 
4:  I,  2).  We  see  here  the  very  heart  of  Paul, —  his 
affection  for  Timothy,  his  unquenchable  zeal  for  the 
promotion  of  Christ's  kingdom,  the  calmness  with 
which  he  looks  forward  to  the  grave,  the  confidence 
with  which  he  looks  upward  to  heaven.  Now  old 
in  years,  and  worn  out  with  many  trials,  deserted 
in  a  great  measure  by  his  friends,  he  waits  with 
calmness  and  with  a  certain  degree  of  satisfaction 
his  approaching  martyrdom,  His  longing  desire  to 
see  Timothy,  the  urgency  with  which  he  entreats 
him  to  come  to  him  with  all  diligence,  the  sadness 
with  which  he  mentions  the  desertion  of  his  friends, 
the  feeling  of  loneliness,  the  craving  after  human 
sympathy  in  this  the  hour  of  his  trial,  are  all  natural 
touches  of  the  state  of  Paul's  feelings,  and  vividly 
represent  him  before  us  as  one  who,  although  stand- 
ing on  the  verge  of  heaven,  was  not  yet  raised  above 
the  common  feelings  of  humanity."  ^^ 

■^5  Gloag's  Introd.  to  the  Pauline  Epistles,  p.  435. 


CHAPTER   VII. 

The  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews. 

Having  finished  our  study  of  the  acknowledged 
Epistles  of  Paul,  it  is  natural  to  take  up  next  the 
study  of  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews.  In  no  place 
does  this  Epistle  make  any  claim  to  Pauline  author- 
ship, its  title  really  being  *'  To  the  Hebrews  "  without 
any  specification  as  to  its  author.  It  differs  from 
the  thirteen  other  Epistles  in  that  they  all  some- 
where explicitly  claim  to  be  Pauline.  This  one  does 
not,  either  in  its  title  or  in  its  body.  The  majority 
of  critics  do  not  accept  it  as  a  Pauline  Epistle.  And 
it  is  to  be  noted  that  even  if  it  could  be  conclusively 
proved  that  its  author  was  not  Paul,  this  fact  would 
not  militate  against  its  canonicity. 

/.  Canoiiicity. 

The  first  witness  to  be  summoned  is  Clement  of 
Rome  (96),  whose  letter  to  the  Corinthians  is  satu- 
rated with  the  language  and  thoughts  of  this  Epistle. 
He  directly  quotes  it  several  times,  although  not  by 
name  ;  while  he  makes  repeated  allusions  to  it.  In 
one  place  he  quotes  it  with  the  formula,  ''for  so  it  is 
written,"  and  by  doing  so  shows  that  he  regarded  it 
as  authoritative  Scripture.  Had  he  any  doubts  about 
its  canonical  authority,  he  could  not  possibly  have 
used  it  as  he  does.  Eusebius,  commenting  on  Clem- 
[230] 


EPISTLE    TO    THE  HEBREWS.  231 

ent's  use  of  this  Epistle,  says  that  Clement  "after 
giving-  many  sentiments  taken  from  the  Epistle  to 
the  Hebrews,  and  also  literally  quoting  the  words, 
most  clearly  shows  that  this  work  is  not  a  late  pro- 
duction. Hence  it  is  probable  that  this  also  was 
numbered  with  the  other  writings  of  the  Apos- 
tle."^ It  is  true  that  he  does  not  ascribe  it  to 
Paul,  but  neither  does  he  do  so  in  regard  to  ac- 
knowledged Pauline  Epistles,  except  First  Corin- 
thians. Bishop  Westcott  writes,  "  It  is  not  too  much 
to  say  that  it  [this  Epistle]  was  wholly  transfused 
into  Clement's  mind."  Justin  Martyr  (145)  unques- 
tionably uses  it,  quoting  *'  it  as  a  scriptural  authority 
of  equal  rank  with  the  book  of  Genesis."  It  is  prob- 
ably quoted  by  Aristides  (138-161)  in  his  apology. 
Marcion  (130)  omitted  it  from  his  list,  and  it  is  not 
contained  in  the  Muratori  Canon  (i/o).  But  both 
the  Syriac  (160)  and  Old  Latin  (i/o)  versions  include 
it.  Clement  of  Alexandria  repeatedly  quotes  it,  as- 
cribing it  to  Paul.  According  to  Eusebius,  Clement 
of  Alexandria  asserts  that  Pantaenus  (185)  affirmed  its 
Pauline  authorship.  By  the  whole  Eastern  Church 
this  Epistle  was  accepted  as  having  canonical  au- 
thority. 

As  to  the  Western  Church,  it  is  evident  that,  with 
the  notable  exception  of  Clement  of  Rome,  it  was 
during  the  latter  part  of  the  second,  and  throughout 
the  third  century,  against  the  canonical  authority 
of  this  Epistle.  Among  those  who  denied  this  are 
Tertullian,  Cyprian,  and  Irenseus.  At  the  beginning 
of  the  fourth  century,  there  was  a  decided  reaction 
in  its  favor,  led  by  such  men  as  Hilary  of  Poitiers 
and  Ambrose  of  Milan.     "  At  the  end  of  the  fourth 

1  Eusebius  H.  E.  3  :  38. 


232  EPISTLE    TO   THE  HEBREWS. 

century,  Jerome,  the  most  learned  and  critical  of  the 
Latin  Fathers,  reviewed  the  conflicting  opinions  as  to 
the  authority  of  this  Epistle.  He  considered  that 
the  prevailing,  though  not  universal,  view  of  the 
Latin  Churches  was  of  less  weight  than  the  views, 
not  only  of  ancient  writers,  but  also  of  all  Greek  and 
all  the  Eastern  Churches,  where  the  Epistle  was 
received  as  canonical  and  read  daily  ;  and  he  pro- 
nounced a  decided  opinion  in  favor  of  its  authority. 
The  great  contemporary  light  of  North  Africa,  St. 
Augustine,  held  a  similar  opinion.  And  after  the 
declaration  of  these  two  eminent  men,  the  Latin 
Churches  united  with  the  East  in  receiving  the 
Epistle.  The  third  Council  of  Carthage  (A.  D.  397) 
gave  final  confirmation  to  their  decision."^ 

Summing  up  the  external  evidence,  it  may  be 
affirmed  that  the  canonical  authority  of  the  Epistle 
was  recognized  all  over  the  Church,  with  the  excep- 
tion of  the  Latin  Churches  from  the  end  of  the  sec- 
ond to  the  end  of  the  fourth  centuries.  No  Greek  or 
Syrian  writer  expresses  any  personal  doubt  in  this 
matter.  The  Latin  Church  seems  to  have  held  to 
the  idea  that  apostolic  authorship,  or  at  least  apos- 
tolic indorsement,  was  essential  to  canonical  author- 
ity. And  as  that  portion  of  the  Church  denied  its 
Pauline  authorship,  it  was  led  likewise  to  deny  its 
canonicity.  The  doubts  all  arose  in  connection  with 
the  uncertainty  of  authorship.  But,  as  has  been 
noted,  that  portion  of  the  Church  swung  into  line  by 
the  end  of  the  fourth  century,  and  positively  affirmed 
its  canonical  authority  in  harmony  with  the  belief 
of  all  the  other  sections  of  the  Church.     As  to  the 

2  Prof.  Thayer,  in  Smith's  Dictionary  of  the  Bible,  p.  1024. 


EPISTLE    TO    THE  HEBREWS.  233 

internal  evidence,  Alford  says  that  ''  nowhere  are  the 
main  doctrines  of  the  faith  more  purely  or  more  ma- 
jestically set  forth  ;  nowhere  is  Holy  Scripture  urged 
with  greater  authority  and  cogency." 

In  all  probability  the  canonical  authority  of  this 
Epistle  would  never  have  been  questioned  had  it 
not  been  for  the  uncertainty  of  authorship.  But 
even  this  uncertainty  ought  never  to  have  occa- 
sioned doubts  as  to  its  canonicity.  We  may  then 
feel  satisfied  that,  whatever  decision  may  eventually 
be  arrived  at  in  regard  to  its  author,  its  canonical 
authority  is  now  unassailable.  The  Epistle  by  its 
own  inherent  worth  won  its  way  into  the  acceptance 
of  the  Church  universal,  because  no  cogent  reasons 
could  be  found  for  rejecting  it  from  the  sacred 
canon.  Professor  Thayer  writes  that  "the  canonical 
authority  of  the  Epistle  is  secure  so  far  as  it  can  be 
established  by  the  tradition  of  the  Christian  Church. 
The  doubts  which  affected  it  were  admitted  in  re- 
mote places,  or  in  the  failure  of  knowledge,  or  under 
the  pressure  of  times  of  intellectual  excitement;  and 
they  have  disappeared  before  full  information  and 
calm  judgment." 

//.  Its  Authorship, 

This  IS  one  of  the  most  difficult  questions  that 
meets  the  student  in  the  New  Testament  Introduc- 
tion. A  vast  mass  of  literature  has  been  written  on 
this  subject,  and  the  probabilities  are  that  we  must 
all  agree  with  the  verdict  of  Origen,  who,  while 
apparently  accepting  it  as  practically  a  Pauline 
Epistle,  says,  *'  Who  wrote  the  Epistle,  God  only 
knows  certainly."     So  far  as  the  external  testimony 


234  EPISTLE    TO    THE  HEBREWS. 

is  concerned,  Paul  is  the  only  person  who  receives 
enough  support  to  be  considered.  The  testimony 
of  Tertullian  in  favor  of  Barnabas  is  the  only  excep- 
tion to  this.  Luke  and  Clement  of  Rome,  it  is  true, 
have  been  mentioned,  but  only  as  editors  or  trans- 
lators rather  than  as  independent  authors.  The  re- 
ceived tradition  and  popular  belief  of  the  East  was 
that  Paul  wrote  it.  The  first  direct  witness  in  favor 
of  Pauline  authorship  is  Pantaenus  (185).  It  is  Clem- 
ent of  Alexandria  who  informs  us  of  this  fact,  and 
he  in  turn,  without  expressing  a  single  doubt  as  to 
its  Pauline  authorship,  states  that  Paul  wrote  this 
Epistle  in  Hebrew  and  that  Luke  translated  it  into 
Greek.  In  this  way  he  accounts  for  its  dissimilarity 
from  Paul's  other  Epistles.  Origen,  who  quotes  this 
Epistle  more  than  two  hundred  times,  has  no  per- 
sonal doubts  as  to  its  authorship,  but  he  refers 
to  the  doubts  of  others.  He  suggests  that  "  the 
thoughts  are  the  Apostle's,  but  the  diction  and  the 
phraseology  belong  to  some  one  who  wrote  down 
what  the  Apostle  said."  He  affirms  that  the  ancient 
men  "  delivered  it  as  coming  from  Paul,"  but  at  the 
same  time  he  confesses,  ^'who  wrote  the  Epistle, 
God  only  knows  certainly."  Dionysius  of  Alexandria 
(247)  maintains  its  Pauline  origin.  The  historian 
Eusebius  (315)  speaks  of  the  fourteen  Epistles  of 
Paul,  and  he  classed  it  among  the  "  acknowledged  " 
books.  Eusebius  adopts  the  explanation  of  Clement 
of  Alexandria,  as  to  the  cause  of  its  differences  from 
the  other  Pauline  Epistles.  After  this  time  the 
Eastern  Church  without  a  dissenting  voice  held  to 
its  Pauline  authorship. 


EPISTLE    TO    THE  HEBREWS,  235 

On  the  other  hand  Tertullian  affirms  that  Barna- 
bas was  its  author.  Caius  of  Rome  (210)  and  Hip- 
polytus  (220)  deny  explicitly  its  Pauline  authorship. 
Irenaeus,  though  quoting  it  in  a  work  now  lost,  does 
not,  so  far  as  we  know,  have  anything  to  say  about 
its  author.  Cyprian  (248)  seems  to  exclude  it,  but 
makes  no  certain  allusions  to  it.  Davidson  sums  up 
the  patristic  evidence  in  the  following  words  :  "In 
the  Western  or  Latin  Church  the  Epistle  was  not 
regarded  as  apostolic  or  Pauline  down  to  the  fourth 
century.  ^  During  this  century,  however,  it  obtained 
a  canonical  position,  and  was  attributed  to  Paul ;  so 
that  in  the  latter  part  of  it  and  afterwards,  the  Epis- 
tle was  firmly  established  in  ecclesiastical  opinion 
among  the  authentic  writings  of  the  Apostle.  The 
causes  which  contributed  to  this  change  of  sentiment 
in  the  Western  Church,  if  it  can  be  properly  called 
a  change,  cannot  be  exactly  traced.  Perhaps  the 
study  of  Origen's  writings  had  its  influence.  We 
know  that  Hilary  and  Ambrose  in  particular  were 
conversant  with  and  largely  influenced  by  these. 
The  ecclesiastical  intercourse,  too,  between  the  East 
and  West,  that  began  to  be  held  at  this  time,  must 
have  brought  the  sentiments  of  the  East  into  the 
West.  Above  all,  the  weight  of  two  names,  Jerome 
and  Augustine,  contributed  largely  to  the  formation 
of  such  an  opinion.  When  these  distinguished  Fath- 
ers quoted  and  used  it  as  the  Apostle's  authentic  pro- 
duction, inferior   writers  might  well  do  the  same."* 

'These  words  ought  to  have  been  modified  by  the  unquestioned 
acceptance  of  it  by  Clement  of  Rome,  who  uses  it  as  authoritative 
scripture.  *  First  Edition,  Vol.  III.,  p.  195. 


236  EPISTLE    TO    THE  HEBREWS. 

The  East  was  undoubtedly  more  critical  than  the 
West.  And  it  is  manifest  that  where  the  East  gave 
expression  to  its  opinion,  it  was  in  favor  of  the  Pau- 
line authorship.  To  the  weight  of  this  opinion  the 
West  finally  and  completely  yielded.  So  much  for 
the  external  testimony  in  this  matter. 

What  now  about  the  internal  testimony  }  And  it 
is  just  here  that  the  opponents  of  Pauline  authorship 
put  forth  their  strongest  arguments.  But  the  argu- 
ment from  style  is  always  precarious,  unless  backed 
up  by  other  considerations.  Here  we  find  equally 
learned  and  acute  critics  arrayed  against  one  another  ; 
some  asserting,  others  denying,  Pauline  authorship. 
It  is  not  denied  that  the  theology  of  the  Epistle  is 
Pauline,  but  it  is  claimed  by  some  that  the  general 
style  of  composition  forbids  Pauline  authorship. 
On  the  other  hand  it  has  been  confidently  affirmed 
"that  the  things  which  have  been  urged  against  the 
hypothesis  of  the  Pauline  authorship  of  the  Epistle, 
are,  on  the  contrary,  in  perfect  harmony  with  it ; 
some  of  them,  indeed,  supplying  confirmatory  proofs 
of  it." 

It  has  been  objected  against  its  Pauline  au- 
thorship, (i.)  that  there  is  the  lack  of  the  usual 
inscription  of  Paul's  name.  In  the  other  thirteen 
Epistles  the  Apostle's  name  is  prefixed,  but  here  it 
is  not.  But,  it  may  be  answered,  that  the  object  and 
destination  of  the  Epistle  will  account  for  this  omis- 
sion. The  very  mention  of  his  name  by  the  Apostle, 
since  he  was  the  Apostle  to  the  Gentiles,  might  have 
interfered  with  its  purpose.  Clement  of  Alexandria 
accounts  for  this  omission  "  by  supposing  that  the 
Apostle  prudently  refrained  from  obtruding  on  the 


EPISTLE    TO    THE  HEBREWS.  237 

Hebrews  a  name  which,  he  knew,  was  unwelcome  to 
them."  (2.)  It  is  objected  that  Paul  would  not  be 
likely  to  write  an  Epistle  to  the  Jews,  since  his  mis- 
sion was  to  the  Gentiles.  But  Paul's  solicitude  for  his 
brethren  according  to  the  flesh  is  well  known.  If  he 
could  write,  ''  I  could  wish  that  myself  were  accursed 
from  Christ  for  my  brethren,  my  kinsmen  according 
to  the  flesh  "  (Rom.  9  :  3),  surely  he  could  also  write 
an  Epistle  to  some  of  them.  (3.)  It  is  held  that  Heb. 
2  : 3  can  only  be  interpreted  as  meaning  that  the 
writer  had  not  heard  the  Lord  Jesus  speak  the  words 
of  truth  in  the  flesh.  But  the  Apostle,  while  dis- 
tinctly claiming  that  he  had  received  his  credentials 
to  preach,  as  well  as  his  knowledge  of  the  truth,  from 
Christ,  and  not  from  man,  never  claims  that  he  had 
seen  Him  in  the  flesh.  These  words  do  not  neces- 
sarily conflict  with  his  statements  elsewhere  in 
regard  to  the  visions  and  revelations  he  had  had. 
But  that  upon  which  the  opponents  of  Pauline 
authorship  lay  the  greatest  stress  is  the  dissimilarity 
in  style  from  the  other  Epistles  of  Paul.  There  is 
no  question  of  the  great  difference  there  is  in  this 
respect.  Delitzsch  writes  that  "the  language  is 
more  oratorical  than  dialectic,  not  so  excited  and 
lively  as  in  the  Epistle  to  the  Galatians,  not  pressing 
forward  with  such  quick,  triumphant  step  as  in  the 
Epistle  to  the  Romans,  not  so  unrestrained  and 
superabundant  as  in  that  to  the  Ephesians,  but 
characterized  throughout  by  conscious  repose,  dig- 
nified solemnity,  and  majestic  quietude."  ^  In  the 
words  of  Dean  Alford,  **  The  main  difference  for  us, 
which  will  also  set  forth  the  characteristic  peculiar- 

^  Delitzsch  on  Hebrews,  Eng.  Tr.,  Vol.  I,  p.  3. 


238  EPISTLE    TO   THE  HEBREWS. 

ity  of  this  Epistle,  is,  that  whereas  Paul  is  ever, 
as  it  were,  struggling  with  the  scantiness  of  human 
speech  to  pour  forth  his  crowding  thoughts,  thereby- 
falling  into  rhetorical  and  grammatical  irregularities, 
the  style  of  our  Epistle  flows  regularly  on,  with  no 
such  suspended  constructions'."  °  But  in  this  con- 
nection it  must  be  remembered  that  there  are  great 
differences  in  style  between  other  and  acknowledged 
Epistles  of  the  Apostle.  The  occasion  and  the  sub- 
ject must  be  allowed  to  dominate  and  fix  the  style 
of  an  Epistle.  The  Apostle  may  have  taken,  and 
undoubtedly  did  take,  much  more  care  than  usual 
in  the  composition  of  this  Epistle.  Dr.  Kay  ^  gives 
a  list  of  seventeen  words  that  are  peculiar  to  this 
Epistle  and  the  speeches  and  other  letters  of  Paul, 
that  are  found  nowhere  else  in  the  New  Testament. 
There  are  also  thirty-four  other  words  that  are 
found  only  here  and  in  Paul's  other  Epistles.  The 
same  writer  shows  that  there  are  ''words  in  the 
Epistle  which  are  seldom  used  in  the  New  Testa- 
ment by  any  except  Paul,  but  which  he  uses  fre- 
quently, or  with  some  peculiarity  of  manner."  A 
man  with  such  versatility  of  mind  as  Paul  had  did 
not  have  to  write  in  exactly  the  same  style  every 
time  he  wrote  a  letter.  He  may  have  taken  spe- 
cial pains  in  the  composition  of  this  Epistle.  "The 
inaccuracy  of  Paul's  Greek  does  not  arise  from  de- 
fective knowledge  of  the  language,  but  from  a  cer- 
tain carelessness  of  style  arising  from  the  fervor 
of  his  spirit."  In  the  more  epistolary  parts  of  this 
Epistle  the  style  of  Paul  is  quite  pronounced.     And 

^Alford's  Gk.  Test.,  Vol.,  IV   Prolegomena,  p.  79. 
'^  Bible  Commentary,  Introd.  to  Hebrews, 


EPISTLE   TO   THE  HEBREWS.  239 

the  very  subject  of  the  Epistle  will  in  large  part 
account  for  its  marked  peculiarities.  That  the  in- 
fluence of  Paul's  modes  of  thought  and  expression 
is  manifest,  none  can  or  do  deny.  There  are  many 
phenomena  in  it  that  are  in  perfect  harmony  with 
Pauline  authorship,  and  these  ought  to  be  given 
their  due   weight. 

The  position  of  this  Epistle  in  the  great  MSS.,  is 
worthy  of  special  note  in  this  connection.  In  the 
English  Bible  it  is  placed  after  the  thirteen  Epistles 
of  Paul.  But  in  the  Sinaitic,  Alexandrian,  and 
Vatican  MSS.,  it  is  placed  immediately  after  Second 
Thessalonians  and  before  the  Pastoral  Epistles.  In 
the  Vatican  MS.,  there  is  evidence  that  it  stood 
after  Galatians  in  an  earlier  MS.  The  weight,  then, 
of  the  MSS.,  is  decidedly  in  favor  of  Pauline  author- 
ship, inasmuch  as  they  place  it  among,  and  not  after, 
the  acknowledged  Epistles,  as  our  English  Version 
does. 

Doctrinal  differences  between  this  Epistle  and  the 
others  have  been  asserted.  But  this  arises  from  the 
entire  omission  of  references  to  themes  prominent 
in  other  Epistles.  This  is  rather  negative  criticism, 
and  surely  new  views  of  the  truth,  or  omissions  of 
certain  customary  doctrinal  statements,  are  not 
inconsistent  with   Pauline   authorship. 

The  writer  of  this  Epistle  must  have  been  a  Jew, 
and  this  fact  alone  would  rule  out  Clement  of  Rome 
or  Luke  as  possible  authors  of  it.  Barnabas  was  not 
suggested  as  its  author  until  Tertullian's  day,  and 
Luther  suggested  that  ApoUos  was  the  author,  but 
before  Luther's  day  no  one  apparently  thought  of 
him  in  this  connection.     If  we  had  any  known  writ- 


240  EPISTLE    TO   THE  HEBREWS. 

ings  from  either  Barnabas  or  Apollos,  we  might  be 
in  a  position  to  speak  definitely,  but  we  have  no 
such  writings,  and  consequently  it  is  only  conjecture 
that  can  associate  either  of  these  names  with  its 
authorship.  And  if  within  one  hundred  and  fifty 
years  after  the  time  of  its  composition,  its  author- 
ship was  largely  a  matter  of  conjecture,  there  is  little 
reason  for  hope  that  the  question  can  ever  be  defi- 
nitely settled.  With  Dr.  Gloag^  we  may  say :  "In 
summing  up  the  internal  evidence,  it  is  difficult  to 
arrive  at  any  definite  conclusion.  The  doctrines 
and  phraseology  of  the  Epistle  point  to  a  Pauline 
origin  ;  whilst  the  want  of  inscription,  and  the  mode 
of  citation  from  the  Old  Testament,^are  un-Pauline. 
The  great  objection  is  the  difference  of  style  ;  but 
we  must  put  against  this  difference  the  peculiar 
Pauline  digressions  with  which  the  Epistle  abounds. 
If  the  external  evidence  in  favor  of  Paul  had  been 
stronger,  we  might  have  disregarded  the  internal ; 
but  still  we  think,  taking  all  things  into  considera- 
tion, that  the  preponderance  of  evidence  is  in  favor 
of  a  Pauline  authorship  ;  at  least  no  person  has  yet 
been  suggested  as  better  entitled  to  be  considered 
the  author  of  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews."^ 

*  Gloag's  Introd.  to  the  Pauline  Epistles,  p.  464. 

^For  a  fuller  investigation  of  this  whole  question,  the  reader  is 
referred  to  the  Introductions  of  Gloag,  Davidson  ist  Ed.,  Dr.  Kay  in 
the  Bible  Commentary,  the  article  "Hebrews"  in  Smith's  Dictionary 
of  the  Bible,  the  Commentaries  of  Lunemann  (The  Meyer  Commen- 
tary), and  Delitzsch,  and  all  the  other  more  elaborate  Introductions. 
The  strongest  argument  against  the  Pauline  authorship  of  the  Epistle 
is  presented  by  Gardner  in  Vol.  XIV.  of  the  Nicene  and  Post- 
Nicene  Fathers,  prefacing  the  Homilies  of  Chrysostora  on  Hebrews. 


EPISTLE    TO    THE  HEBREWS.  241 

///.    To   Whom   Written. 

It  is  addressed  briefly  "  to  the  Hebrews."  The 
voluminous  discussion  of  this  subject  has  resulted  in 
a  well-nigh  unanimous  verdict  among  scholars  that 
it  was  written  to  Palestinian  Jews,  especially  those 
of  Jerusalem.  ''The  whole  tenor  of  the  Epistle  im- 
plies that  the  persons  to  whom  it  was  written,  lived 
under  the  shadow  of  the  Temple  services."  Some 
have  striven  to  prove  that  it  was  written  to  Alex- 
andrian Jews,  but  the  evidence  is  decidedly  against 
this  theory.  How  natural  it  was  that  Paul  should 
write  to  those  Jews  among  whom  his  early  days  had 
been  spent  by  him  as  a  zealot  for  the  law ! 

IV.   The  Occasion  and  Object  of  the  Epistle. 

"The  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews,"  writes  Lunemann, 
"was  occasioned  by  the  danger  to  which  the  Chris- 
tians in  Palestine,  particularly  in  Jerusalem,  were 
exposed,  of  renouncing  again  their  faith  in  Christ, 
and  wholly  falling  back  into  Judaism  (cf.  specially 
6:4-6;  io:26ff).  This  danger  had  become  a  very 
pressing  one,  inasmuch  as  many  had  already  as  a 
matter  of  fact  ceased  to  frequent  the  Christian  as- 
semblies (10:25)."^^  The  object  of  the  Epistle  was 
to  strengthen  and  comfort  his  readers  in  their  perse- 
cutions, and,  at  the  same  time,  to  warn  them  against 
the  danger  of  apostasy  to  Judaism.  "  The  Epistle 
aims,  by  the  unfolding  on  every  side  of  the  sub- 
limity of  the  Christian  revelation  as  the  perfect  and 
archetypal,  above  that  of  the  Old  Testament  as  the 
merely  preparatory  and  typical,  as  well  as  by  setting 

i**  Lunemann  in  the  Meyer  Commentary  on  Hebrews. 
16 


242  EPISTLE    TO    THE  HEBREWS. 

forth  the  terrible  consequences  of  an  apostasy,  to 
warn  against  such  falling  away,  and  to  animate  to 
a  faithful  perseverance  in  the  Christian  course." 

V.   The  Outline  of  the  Epistle. 

Because  of  the  importance  of  this  Epistle,  a  fuller 
outline  than  usual  seems  in  place.  The  following  ad- 
heres closely  to  the  analysis  given  by  Dr.  Weidner." 

1.  In  former  revelations,  God  spoke  through  the 
prophets,  but    now    he    speaks  in  His    Son.     i  :  1-3. 

2.  Who  is  superior  to  the  angels,     i  :4-i4. 

3.  To  whose  message  we  ought  to  give  the  more 
earnest  heed.     2  :  1-4. 

4.  By  His  incarnation  the  Son  of  God  was  brought 
lower  than  the  angels  and  to  the  level  of  man  for  a 
time,  that  in  the  state  of  humiliation  He  might  be  a 
perfect  Redeemer.     2  :  5-18. 

5.  As  our  High  Priest,  Jesus  is  superior  to  Moses. 

3  :  1-6. 

6.  Let  us  not  through  unfaithfulness  fail  of  the 
promises,  but  let  us  give  due  diligence  to  attain  to 
them.     3:7-4:13. 

7.  Having  such  a  merciful  High  Priest,  let  us 
through  Him  draw  near  to  God.     4  :  14-16. 

8.  Christ  is  the  true  High  Priest,  after  the  order 
of  Melchisedec.     5:1-10. 

9.  Low  spiritual  attainments  of  his  readers.  5  • 
11-14. 

10.  Warning  to  them  of  the  necessity  of  progress 
and  of  the  peril  of  falling  back.     6  :  1-8. 

11.  Encourages  them  by  telling  them  oi  God's 
faithfulness.     6  : 9-20. 

11  Studies  in  the  Book,  Third  Series, 


EPISTLE    TO    THE  HEBREWS.  243 

12.  The  priesthood  of  Melchisedec, —  its  glory, 
7 :  1-3,  its  superiority  to  the  Levitical  priesthood. 
7:4-10. 

13.  Jesus  is  the  true  High  Priest  after  the  order  of 
Melchisedec,  /:  11-25, —  not  of  the  race  of  Aaron, 
7:11-14;  nor  by  carnal  descent  of  any  kind,  but 
through  the  absolute  dignity  of  His  own  person, 
7:15-19;  appointed  with  a  divine  oath,  7:20-22; 
with  an  unchangeable  priesthood,  ever  living  to 
make    intercession    for   us,  7:23-25. 

14.  Christ  being  then  the  true  High  Priest,  He  is 
superior  to  the  Aaronic  priesthood  not  only  in  the 
nature  of  His  Priesthood,  but  also  in  the  nature  of 
His  ministrations.     7  :  26-28. 

15.  This  superiority  is  manifest  from  the  divine 
and  heavenly  sphere  in  which  His  offices  are  dis- 
charged, 8  :  1-6,  as  well  as  from  the  superiority  of  the 
New  Covenant  under  which  He  acts,  8  :7-i3,  as  well 
as  by  its  eternal  validity,  9  :  1-12. 

16.  For  the  blood  of  Christ  purifies  us  inwardly, 
9:13,  14;  His  redeeming  death  is  the  consecration 
of  the  New  Covenant,  9:15-23,  and  His  entrance 
into  the  eternal  sanctuary  is  the  seal  of  the  absolute 
remission  of  sin,  9  :  24-28. 

17.  His  own  sacrifice  of  Himself  is  the  complete 
and  only  adequate  fulfillment  of  the  will  of  God,  10: 
i-io ;  He  is  henceforth  exalted  to  the  right  hand 
of  God,  10:11-14;  and  His  death  is  the  inaugura- 
tion of  that  New  Covenant.     10:  15-18. 

18.  Exhortation  to  steadfastness  in  faith  and  good 
works.     10 :  19-39. 

19.  Illustrations  of  the  nature  and  power  of  faith. 
II  ; 1-40. 


244  EPISTLE   TO   THE  HEBREWS. 

20.  Renewed  exhortations  to  continued  persever- 
ance and  patience,  with  warnings  against  apostasy. 
12  :  1-17. 

21.  Punishment  under  the  New  Covenant  greater 
than  under  the  Old.     12  :  18-29. 

22.  Exhortation  to  brotherly  love,  purity,  and  con- 
tentment.    13  :  1-6. 

23.  Imitate  your  Christian  teachers  —  bear  the  re- 
proach of  Christ.     13  :  7-17. 

24.  Closing  prayers   and   salutations.     13  :  18-25. 

VI.  The  Time  and  Place  of  Composition. 

This  Epistle  was  certainly  written  before  the  de- 
struction of  the  Temple  in  70  A.  D.,  for  it  presup- 
poses not  only  the  existence  of  that  structure,  but 
also  the  continuation  of  the  Temple  services  at  the 
time  of  its  composition.  *' The  persons  addressed 
had  been  long  converted  to  Christianity  (5  :  12)  ; 
they  had  suffered  much  in  its  service  (10 :  32-37  ;  12  : 
4,  5)  ;  many  of  their  teachers  were  dead  (3:7);  and 
they  were  evidently  exposed  to  various  trials  which 
exercised  their  patience  and  Christian  principle." 
These  facts  necessitate  as  late  a  date  as  possible 
before  the  destruction  of  the  Temple.  If  Paul  was 
the  author,  it  must  have  been  written  after  his  lib- 
eration from  his  first  Roman  imprisonment  in  63 
A.  D.  It  was  probably  written  soon  after  that  date, 
and  when  he  wrote  he  was  probably  still  in  Italy. 
We  date  it  late  in  63  A.  D.  or  early  in  64  A.  D.,  with- 
out being  able  to  assert  absolutely  in  this  matter. 


EPISTLE   TO   THE  HEBREWS.  245 

VII.  Peculiarities  of  the  Epistle. 

These  are  numerous  and  marked.  The  name  of 
the  author  is  not  given  in  it.  The  bulk  of  the  Epistle 
is  not  in  the  usual  epistolary  style, —  some  have  held 
that  it  is  a  short  treatise  rather  than  an  epistle.  It 
is  peculiarly  scholarly  in  its  composition,  being  writ- 
ten in  better  Greek  than  the  other  Pauline  Epistles. 
Much  has  been  written  about  the  resemblance  be- 
tween Philo's  writings  and  this  Epistle.  But  it  is  to 
be  noted  that  while  Philo  allegorizes  the  facts  of  the 
Old  Testament,  so  as  to  convert  them  almost  into 
myths,  this  Epistle  deals  with  them  as  real  historical 
facts,  though  facts  that  typified  the  person  and  work 
of  Christ.  "  Hebrews  shows  that  Judaism  was  the 
shadow,  Christianity  the  substance ;  Judaism  the 
picture,  Christianity  the  original ;  Judaism  the  husk, 
Christianity  the  kernel  within  ;  Judaism  the  body,  » 
Christianity  the  spirit ;  Judaism  the  type,  Chris- 
tianity the  anti-type  :  and  as  the  substance  is  always 
better  than  the  shadow,  the  reality  than  the  picture, 
the  kernel  wrapped  up  in  the  husk  than  the  husk 
itself,  the  spirit  than  the  body,  the  anti-type  than 
the  type,  so  is  Christianity  better  than  Judaism. 
The  word  '  better '  is  the  key  word  of  Hebrews."  ^^ 

If  comparisons  of  this  kind  are  allowable,  it  may 
be  said  that  this  is  the  Epistle  par  excellence  for 
to-day.  Nowhere  better  than  here,  can  we  see  de- 
tailed the  truths  of  Christianity  that  need  to  have  a 
profound  hold  upon  Christians.  In  this  stately  and 
majestic  Epistle  we  can  read  in  language  too  plain 
to  be  misunderstood,  the  true  character  of  our  great 

12  Dr.  Moorhead  in  a  lecture  before  Moody's  Bible  Institute. 


246  EPISTLE    TO   THE  HEBREWS. 

High  Priest,  who  can  be  touched  with  the  feeling  of 
our  infirmities.  Whatever  doubts  may  arise  as  to 
authorship,  they  can  never  hold  against  the  inspira- 
tion of  this  wonderful  Epistle,  which,  in  sublime 
language  and  with  sustained  conception  of  the 
Person  and  work  of  the  Redeemer,  brings  alike  the 
divinity  and  the  humanity  of  the  Saviour  to  bear 
on  the  believer. 


CHAPTER  VIII. 

The  Catholic  Epistles  —  General  Intro- 
duction. 

The  next  group  of  books  that  we  are  to  study  is 
commonly  called  the  Catholic  or  General  Epistles. 
The  most  satisfactory  explanation  of  the  title  *'  Cath- 
olic "  is  that  which  understands  it  as  meaning  those 
letters  which  were  generally  addressed  to  a  wider 
constituency  than  the  Pauline  Epistles.  "The  term 
Catholic  was  first  employed  to  denote  those  Epistles 
not  addressed  to  any  particular  individual  or  church, 
but  to  the  Church  in  general,  or  at  least  to  a  wide 
circle  of  readers.  In  the  process  of  time  it  became 
a  technical  term,  used  to  designate  that  group  of 
Epistles,  as  distinguished  from  the  other  three 
groups  in  the  New  Testament,  namely,  the  Gospels 
and  the  Acts  ;  the  Pauline  Epistles,  including  the 
Hebrews  ;  and  the  Apocalypse."  It  is  true  that  the 
so-called  Epistle  to  the  Ephesians  is  really  an  en- 
cyclical Epistle,  and  therefore  Catholic  in  the  sense 
here  used,  but  it  is  naturally  grouped  with  the  Pau- 
line Epistles.  Some  reasons  might  be  advanced 
for  including  Hebrews  in  this  group,  but  it  also  is 
naturally  associated  with  the  Pauline  group,  even 
though  it  may  finally  be  proven  that  Paul  did  not 
write  it. 

[247] 


248  THE   CATHOLIC  EPISTLES, 

Seven  Epistles  are  embraced  in  this  group, 
namely,  one  by  James,  two  by  Peter,  three  by 
John,  and  one  by  Jude.  The  Second  and  Third 
Epistles  of  John  are  addressed  to  individuals,  and 
consequently  are  not  Catholic  in  the  sense  already 
defined  ;  but  at  a  very  early  date  they  became  at- 
tached to  the  First  Epistle,  and  therefore  are  placed 
with  it  in  this  group.  It  is  a  matter  of  history  that 
all  of  these  Epistles  were  not  uniformly  accorded  a 
place  in  the  Canon  in  the  early  days  of  Christianity. 
The  Muratori  Canon  does  not  mention  James,  or 
First  and  Second  Peter.  It  is  well  to  remember, 
however,  the  fragmentary  character  of  this  Canon. 
Eusebius  places  First  Peter  and  First  John  among 
the  acknowledged  (homologoumena)  and  the  other 
five  of  this  group  among  the  disputed  (antilegom- 
ena)  writings.  He  writes,  '*  Among  the  disputed 
books,  although  they  are  well  known  and  approved 
by  many,  are  reputed  those  called  the  Epistles  of 
James  and  Jude,  also  the  Second  Epistle  of  Peter, 
and  those  called  the  Second  and  Third  of  John."  ^ 
The  Byzantine,  Alexandrian,  and  Western  Churches 
held  to  and  used  all  seven  of  these  Epistles.  The 
Peshito  Syriac  Version  includes  only  James,  First 
Peter,  and  First  John.  "  But,"  says  Professor  War- 
field,  '*  it  is  very  doubtful  whether  this  was  the  orig- 
inal canon  of  that  church  or  not  rather  the  result  of 
Antiochene  critical  revision.  Ephraim  Syrus  of  the 
generation  earlier  than  Chrysostom  certainly  had 
all  seven  Epistles  in  an  older  Syriac  translation  : 
which  seems  to  show  that  the  Syriac  Version  before 
Chrysostom  contained    all  seven   of  these  Epistles. 

1  Eusebius  H.  E.  3  :  25. 


GENERAL  INTRODUCTION.  249 

That  the  seven  existed  before  and  were  together 
considered  an  element  in  the  make  up  of  the  New- 
Testament,  seems  to  follow  from  the  fact  that 
Clemens  Alexandrinus  commented  on  them,  and 
Origen    possessed  them  all." 

**  Subsequently  to  the  time  of  Eusebius  the  whole 
seven  Epistles  were  admitted  into  the  Canon,  and  are 
mentioned  in  the  various  ecclesiastical  catalogues, 
which  were  promulgated  by  the  Councils  of  the 
Church,  or  given  in  the  works  of  the  celebrated 
Fathers.  Thus  they  are  contained  in  the  catalogue 
of  Athanasius  (330),  the  Council  of  Laodicea  (363), 
the  Apostolical  Constitutions  (370),  Jerome  (390), 
Augustine  (395),  the  Third  Council  of  Carthage 
(397)>  ai^d  the  authoritative  catalogue  of  Pope  In- 
nocent I.  (405)."' 

I.    THE   EPISTLE   OF   JAMES. 

/.   Caiionicity. 

There  was  some  doubt  in  the  early  Church  in 
regard  to  the  canonical  authority  of  this  Epistle. 
Eusebius  classifies  it  among  the  Disputed  (Antile- 
gomena)  writings,  although  he  does  not  seem  to 
have  participated  in  these  doubts  himself.  Origen 
(230)  is  the  first  writer  who  explicitly  quotes  it.  In 
the  extant  writings  of  Clement  of  Alexandria  (195) 
it  is  not  quoted,  yet  we  know  from  Cassiodorus  and 
Eusebius  that  this  Clement  wrote  a  commentary  on 
it.  Clement  of  Rome  (96)  has  numerous  apparent 
references  or  allusions  to  this  Epistle,  which  it  is 
claimed  by  some  are  positive  traces  of  it.     There  is 

^Gloag's  Introd.  to  the  Catholic  Epistles,  p.  15. 


250  THE  CATHOLIC  EPISTLES. 

no  question  of  the  use  of  it  by  the  Testaments  of 
the  Twelve  Patriarchs  (120).  It  is  also  quite  widely- 
acknowledged  that  Hermas  (140-150)  used  this  Epis- 
tle. "  His  use  of  James  and  Revelation  is  beyond 
all  doubt :  whole  sections  are  sometimes  framed  on 
their  words."  Of  its  position  in  the  Peshito  Syriac 
Version,  it  has  been  said,  "  This  testimony  is  of  the 
greatest  importance,  as  the  country  from  which  the 
Peshito  proceeded  closely  bordered  on  that  from 
which  this  Epistle  originated,  and  as  that  testimony 
was  also  repeated  and  believed  in  by  the  Syriac 
Church  of  the  following  age."  The  voices  of  Iren- 
seus  (175)  and  of  Tertullian  (190)  may  doubtless  be 
claimed  in  behalf  of  this  Epistle,  although  they  do 
not  name  it.  And  going  back  even  to  apostolic 
times,  a  close  examination  of  the  First  Epistle  of 
Peter  has  led  many  to  claim  that  it  is  a  witness  in 
favor  of  this  Epistle,  because  of  its  manifest  depend- 
ance  on   it. 

Turning  now  to  the  interiial  evidence,  we  may 
feel  that  it  is  positively  in  favor  of  the  canonicity  of 
the  book.  Bleek  affirms  that  ''  the  authenticity  of 
this  Epistle  is  vouched  for  by  its  entire  character 
and  contents."  If  it  was,  as  some  claim,  a  forgery 
of  the  second  century,  the  writer  would  have  been 
more  careful  to  define  his  authority  and  state  his 
office.  As  it  is,  the  simple  designation,  "James,  a 
servant  of  God  and  of  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ,"  is 
strong  evidence  in  its  favor.  No  forger  would  have 
been  content  with  that  description  alone.  Among 
the  objections  that  have  been  brought  up  against  it, 
is  its  asserted  conflict  with  Paul's  doctrine  of  justifi- 
cation by  faith  (2  :  14-26).     But  there  is  no  real  con- 


JAMES.  251 

flict  here.  The  writers,  James  and  Paul,  are  looking- 
at  the  same  matter  from  two  different  standpoints. 
A  calm  investigation  of  the  passage  in  question  is 
sufficient  to  show  that  this  objection  is  unfounded. 
Reuss  has  called  attention  to  the  fact  that  this  Epis- 
tle **  contains  in  itself  alone  more  verbal  reminis- 
cences of  the  discourses  of  Jesus  than  all  the  other 
apostolic  writings  taken  together."^  This  fact  alone 
proclaims  its  author  to  have  been  an  eye-witness  of 
the  works,  as  well  as  a  hearer  of  the  words,  of  the 
Lord.  And  so  far  as  the  personality  of  the  writer 
appears,  it  is  in  perfect  keeping  with  the  character 
of  the  man  set  before  us  in  the  history  of  the  Acts  as 
the  prominent  James. 

This  Epistle  was  called  a  ''  strawy  Epistle "  by 
Martin  Luther,  and  by  him  rejected.  The  basis  of 
his  rejection  of  It  was  its  apparent  conflict  with  Paul. 
But  despite  all  the  objections  that  have  been  raised 
against  this  Epistle,  it  is  by  the  Church  as  a  whole 
immoveably  imbedded  in  the  sacred  Canon.  Its  late 
recognition  all  over  the  Church  can  easily  be  ex- 
plained by  the  facts  of  the  Epistle.  There  was  an 
uncertainty  in  regard  to  its  author  ;  it  was  written  for 
Jewish  Christians,  and  It  was  supposed  by  some  to 
be  aimed  at  Paul  In  a  controversial  way.  All  of 
these  things  operated  to  retard  its  progress  into  the 
general  recognition.  But  at  length  it  did  win  its 
way,  and  it  obtained  Its  due,  and  by  the  verdict  of 
all  parts  of  the  Church  was  accorded  a  place  in  the 
Canon.  And  so  far  not  a  single  writer  has  advanced 
a  strong  enough  argument  to  even  shake  Its  position 
in  that  Canon. 

2  Reuss'  History  of  the  N.  T.,  p.  140. 


252  THE  CATHOLIC  EPISTLES. 

II.   The  Authorship  of  the  Epistle. 

Which  James  mentioned  in  the  New  Testament 
was  the  author  of  this  Epistle  ?  This  question  has 
occasioned  no  little  controversy  among  scholars,  and 
there  is  by  no  means  any  general  agreement  on  this 
matter  as  yet.  The  author  designates  himself  as 
"James  a  servant  of  God  and  of  the  Lord  Jesus 
Christ."  It  is  to  be  noted  that  the  author  does  not 
in  any  place  claim  to  be  an  Apostle.  There  are  but 
three  candidates  for  the  honor  of  having  written  this 
Epistle.  They  are  James  the  son  of  Zebedee  and 
James  the  son  of  Alphseus,  both  of  whom  were 
Apostles,  and  the  James  who  became  so  prominent 
in  the  church  at  Jerusalem,  and  is  called  the  Lord's 
brother.  Some  scholars  claim  that  James  the  son  of 
Alphaeus  is  the  same  person  as  James  the  Lord's 
brother.*  Very  few  persons  have  ever  thought  of 
ascribing  this  Epistle  to  James  the  son  of  Zebedee, 
who  died  in  44  A.  D.  The  next  question  that  con- 
fronts us  is  in  regard  to  the  asserted  identity  of 
the   other   two   Jameses   mentioned. 

Against  the  identification  of  these  two  men,  it  may 
be  noted,  (i.)  that  the  brethren  of  Jesus  are  always 
represented  in  the  New  Testament  as  a  different  set 
of  men  from  the  Apostles  (John  2  :  12  ;  Matt.  12  :  46  ; 

*  This  intricate  question  cannot  be  examined  in  all  its  details  in  this 
work.  The  reader  is  referred  for  the  fuller  discussion  of  this  question, 
as  well  as  that  of  the  relation  that  existed  between  the  Saviour  and 
those  men  who  are  called  "  the  brethren  of  our  Lord,"  to  such  works  as 
Andrews',  Farrar's,  and  Lange's  Lives  of  Christ,  and  Bleek's,  Weiss', 
Davidson's  {ist  Ed.),  Gloag's,  Michaelis',  and  Salmon's  Introductions, 
Huther  on  James,  Lightfoot  on  Galatians,  Smith's  Dictionary  of  the 
Bible,  etc. 


JAMES.  253 

Mark  3  :  21,  31  ;  Luke  8  :  19  ;  John  7:3;  Acts  i  :  14  ; 
I  Cor.  9 :  5).  And  then  we  have  the  statement  of 
John  that  Jesus'  brethren  did  not  believe  in  Him  (John 
7  : 5.)  (2.)  There  is  no  intimation  that  James  the  son 
of  Alphaeus  was  the  brother  of  Christ,  or  that  he  was 
in  any  way  related  to  Him.  Four  women,  and  not 
only  three,  are  mentioned  in  John  19:25,  unless  we 
can  believe  that  two  sisters  bore  the  same  name, 
Mary,  which  is  highly  improbable.  (3.)  This  theory 
necessitates  several  assumptions  ;  namely,  that  the 
word  '*  brethren  "  really  means  cousins  ;  that  Alphseus 
and  Clopas  are  the  same  name  ;  that  three  women 
only  are  mentioned  in  John  19 :  25  ;  and  that  Mary, 
the  mother  of  Jesus,  had  a  sister  of  the  same  name, 
who  was  the  mother  of  James  the  less,  or  James  the 
son  of  Alphaeus  and  Joses  ;  that  Acts  i  :  13  should 
read  as  in  the  Authorized  Version,  **  Judas  the 
brother  of  James,"  and  not  as  given  in  the  Revised 
Version,  '*  Judas  the  son  of  James."  If  any  of  these 
assumptions  are  overturned,  it  is  fatal  to  the  whole 
theory.  Now  it  is  by  no  means  proven  that  Al- 
phaeus and  Clopas  are  in  reality  the  same  name. 
Unquestionably  four  women  and  not  three  only  are 
mentioned  in  John  19  :  25.  And  there  is  no  real  rea- 
son for  assuming  that  the  word  brethren  is  not  used 
in  its  natural  sense. 

Assuming,  then,  that  these  two  names  belong  to 
different  men,  it  is  evident  that  James  the  son  of 
Alphaeus  could  not  have  been  the  author  of  this 
Epistle.  This  leaves  James,  the  Lord's  brother,  the 
James  who  occupied  such  a  prominent  relation  to 
the  church  at  Jerusalem,  as  the  only  possible  author. 
It  now  remains  for  us  to  define  the  relation   of  this 


254  THE  CATHOLIC  EPISTLES. 

James  to  our  Lord.  According  to  the  Helvidian 
theory,^  which  is  here  adopted,  James  was  a  younger 
brother  of  Jesus,  and  the  son  of  Joseph  and  Mary. 
This  theory  maintains  that  the  brethren  of  our  Lord 
were  the  natural  children  of  Joseph  and  Mary,  and 
younger  than  Jesus  ;  and  that  there  were  four  sons, 
namely,  James,  Joses  (or  Joseph),  Jude  and  Simon,  to- 
gether with  some  unnamed  daughters  (Matt.  13:55,  56). 
These  children,  wherever  referred  to,  are  usually  asso- 
ciated with  Mary.  So  far  as  the  Gospel  record  is 
concerned,  Alphaeus  is  only  directly  mentioned  as 
the  father  of  a  James  and  a  Joses.  Hegesippus  in- 
forms us  that  Clopas  had  a  son,  named  Simon.  It 
has  been  objected,  assuming  that  Alphaeus  and 
Clopas  are  the  same  name,  that  it  would  be  unlikely 
that  there  should  be  so  many  of  the  same  names 
who  were  cousins.  Hegesippus  tells  us  that  the 
Simon  he  names  was  the  first  cousin  of  James  the 
Lord's  brother,  that  Joseph  and  Clopas  were  broth- 
ers. But  even  if  it  is  true  that  there  were  three 
brothers   named  James,  Jude,  and  Simon,  the  sons  of 

5  Five  important  theories  have  been  held  on  this  subject ;  namely, 
(i.)  The  Helvidian,  which  supposes  that  the  brethren  of  Jesus  were 
His  actual  brothers,  younger  children  of  Joseph  and  Mary.  (2.)  The 
Epiphanian,  which  supposes  that  they  were  half-brothers,  the  children 
of  Joseph  and  an  earlier  wife  than  Mary.  (3.)  The  Hieronymian, 
which  supposes  that  they  were  cousins,  the  children  of  Alphaeus  and 
Mary  the  supposed  sister  of  the  Virgin  (John  19  :  25).  (4.)  The  Lange- 
ian,  which  supposes  that  they  were  cousins,  through  Joseph  and  not 
Mary,  being  the  children  of  Clopas,  whom  Hegesippus  states  was  the 
brother  of  Joseph.  (5.)  The  Theophylactian,  which  supposes  that 
Clopas,  brother  of  Joseph,  having  died  childless,  Joseph  by  a  levirate 
marriage  raised  up  children  to  his  brother,  which  children  were  thus  as 
(legal)  sons  of  Clopas  our  Lord's  cousins,  but  as  (natural)  sons  of 
Joseph,  His  brothers. 


JAMES.  255 

Clopas  (and  granting,  for  the  sake  of  argument,  that 
Clopas  and  Alphaeus  are  the  same  name),  there  is 
nothing  strange  or  unlikely  in  the  reduplication  of 
the  same  names  in  the  families  of  brothers.  "  Others 
regard  it  as  a  decisive  proof  that  Mary  had  no  other 
son,  that  Jesus  upon  the  cross  should  have  com- 
mended her  to  the  care  of  John  (John  19:26,27). 
But,  why,  if  James  and  Jude  were  Apostles  and  His 
cousins,  sons  of  her  sister  and  long  inmates  of  her 
family,  and  it  were  a  question  of  kinship,  did  He  not 
commend  her  to  their  care  }  If  His  brethren  were 
at  this  time,  as  we  may  suppose,  unbelieving,  and 
thus  in  a  most  vital  point  without  sympathy  with 
her,  we  can  well  understand  why  He  should  give 
John,  the  disciple  whom  He  loved,  to  be  her  son, 
not  so  much  to  supply  her  mere  bodily  needs,  as  to 
comfort  and  strengthen  her  in  the  peculiar  trials 
through  which  she  would  be  immediately  called  to 
pass."  ^  Some  hold  that  James  is  identified  with  the 
son  of  Alphaeus  in  Gal.  i  :  19,  being  there  called  an 
Apostle.  But  this  hinges  entirely  on  the  use  of  the 
words  there  translated  "  except,"  an  inference  de- 
nied by  others.  But  that  passage  does  not  necessa- 
rily call  James  an  Apostle,  even  though  it  may  at  first 
sight  seem  to  do  so.^ 

It  is  to  be  further  noted  that  the  brethren  of  our 
Lord  are  always  mentioned  in  connection  with  Mary. 
The  natural  interpretation  is  that  they  were  her  own 
sons,  and   not  her   nephews.     They  lived  with  her, 

'''Andrews'  Life  of  our  Lord,  p.  115. 

*The  Greek  words  ei  me  except  the  verbal  idea  of  the  sentence, 
which  may  be  more  fully  translated,  "  But  other  of  the  Apostles  I  did 
not  see,  yet  I  saw  James,  the  Lord's  brother." 


256  THE   CATHOLIC  EPISTLES. 

and  always  stand  in  the  relation  of  actual  sons  to 
her.  The  real  reason  for  the  attempt  to  prove  that 
they  were  not  her  own  sons  is  found  in  the  desire  to 
preserve  the  perpetual  virginity  of  Mary,  a  cardinal 
doctrine  in  the  Romish  Church.  But,  however  laud- 
able a  purpose  that  may  be  from  a  certain  stand- 
point, it  ought  not  to  be  allowed  to  overturn  the 
positive  arguments  that  may  be  advanced  in  favor  of 
her  having  borne  children  by  natural  generation. 

Having  established  the  relationship  of  James  to 
our  Lord  as  being  that  of  actual  brotherhood,  it 
remains  to  give  a  sketch  of  his  life.  He  unquestion- 
ably was  the  oldest  of  the  brethren  of  Christ.  To 
him  the  Lord  appeared  after  His  resurrection  (i  Cor. 
15  •/)»  vouchsafing  to  him  a  special  revelation  of  His 
risen  self  That  that  appearance  dissolved  all  of 
James'  former  doubt  is  undeniable.  From  that  time 
forth  he  became  a  loyal  believer  in  Christ's  Mes- 
siahship.  This  fact  accounts  for  James'  appearance 
among  the  believers  in  Acts  i  :  14.  When  Paul  came 
to  the  Council  of  Jerusalem  in  50  A.  D.,  James  had 
become  one  of  the  pillars  of  the  Church  (Gal.  2  19). 
He,  at  least  as  early  as  44  A.  D.,  had  become  promi- 
nent (Acts  12  :  17).  His  position  at  the  Council  of 
Jerusalem  (Acts  15  :  12  ff )  was  that  of  special  promi- 
nence, he  apparently  being  the  presiding  officer  at 
that  conference.  And  when  Paul  came  to  Jerusalem 
at  the  end  of  his  third  missionary  journey,  it  was  to 
James  that  he  formally  reported  (Acts  21  :  18).  Al- 
though the  tendency  of  the  man  was  towards  an 
ascetic  life,  he  was  a  married  man  (i  Cor.  9 : 5). 
"His  attachment  to  the  law  is  apparent  in  the  Coun- 
cil of  Acts  15,  where  he  speaks  for  the  Jewish  con- 


JAMES.  257 

science;  and  in  Acts  21,  where  he  counsels  Paul  — 
a  counsel  willingly  obeyed  —  to  follow  out  a  pecul- 
iarly Jewish  rite  ;  and  even  in  Gal.  2  :  12,  where  his 
name  can  be  used  by  intense  Judaizers."  Josephus 
tells  us  that  his  death  occurred  just  after  the  death 
of  Festus  in  62  A.  D.  It  is  Eusebius  that  tells  us 
that  the  Jews,  enraged  over  Paul's  appeal  to  Caesar 
and  his  being  sent  in  accordance  with  it  to  Rome, 
seized  upon  James  during  the  interregnum  between 
the  death  of  Festus  and  the  arrival  of  his  successor, 
and  beat  him  to  death  with  a  club. 

Many  traditions  revolve  around  the  name  of  James, 
the  majority  of  which  are  unquestionably  apocry- 
phal. It  is  said  that  he  spent  so  much  time  in  prayer 
on  his  knees  in  the  temple  that  they  became  as  cal- 
lous as  a  camel's  knees.  There  is  no  question  of  the 
high  esteem  in  which  he  was  held  by  the  masses  of 
the  Jews  in  the  city  of  Jerusalem,  who  openly  con- 
demned the  violence  that  was  done  him  by  some  of 
their  countrymen  at  the  time  of  his  death.  His  life 
was  that  of  the  strictest  integrity  and  uprightness, 
so  that  he  was  well  called  "  The  Just."  While  it  is 
probable  that  his  relationship  to  Jesus  may  have 
aided  in  elevating  him  to  the  high  position  he  held  in 
the  Church,  yet  his  own  personal  qualifications  had 
much  to  do  with  that  elevation.  His  rigid  keeping 
of  the  requirements  of  the  law  secured  for  him  the 
admiration  even  of  unbelieving  Jews.  '*  He  did  not 
dissever  Christianity  from  Judaism,  but  regarded 
Christianity  as  the  development  and  perfection  of 
Judaism." 

"  Had  not  the  influence  of  James  been  modified 
and  completed  by  that  of  a  Peter  and  especially  a 

17 


258  THE  CATHOLIC  EPISTLES. 

Paul,  Christianity  perhaps  would  never  have  cast  ofY 
entirely  the  envelope  of  Judaism  and  risen  to  indepen- 
dence. Yet  the  influence  of  James  was  necessary. 
He,  if  any,  could  gain  the  ancient  chosen  nation  in  a 
body.  God  placed  such  a  representative  of  the  pur- 
est form  of  Old  Testament  piety  in  the  midst  of  the 
Jews,  to  make  their  transition  to  the  faith  of  the 
Messiah  as  easy  as  possible,  even  at  the  eleventh 
hour.  But  when  they  refused  this  last  messenger  of 
peace,  the  divine  forbearance  was  exhausted,  and  the 
fearful,  long-threatened  judgment  broke  upon  them. 
And  with  this  the  mission  of  James  was  fulfilled. 
He  was  not  to  outlive  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem 
and  the  temple."^ 

///.   To   Whom  Addressed. 

The  Epistle  is  addressed  ''to  thetwelve  tribes 
which  are  scattered  abroad,"  i.  e.^  to  the^  Dispersion 
(Gk.  Diaspora).  Some  have  understood  this  address 
as  meaning  Christians  in  general,  taking  the  term 
in  a  figurative  sense.  Others  think  it  is  meant  to 
include  all  Jews,  whether  believers  or  not.  A  third 
class  would  limit  it  to  the  Jewish  Christians  outside 
of  Palestine,  and  this  is  doubtless  the  correct  view. 
The  writer  addresses  his  readers  as  "brethren;" 
they  were  persons  who  had  "the  faith  of  our  Lord 
Jesus  Christ."  Dr.  Gloag  writes,  "The  readers,  who- 
ever they  were,  were  at  least  Christians.  James  rests 
his  authority  upon  his  being  a  servant  of  God  and  of 
the  Lord  Jesus  Christ  (i  :  i) ;  he  speaks  of  his  readers 
as  having  been  begotten  again  by  the  word  of  God, 

« Quoted  from  Dr.  Schaff  by  Gloag,  Introd.  to  Catholic  Epistles, 
P-43. 


JAMES.  259 

and  as  possessing  the  faith  of  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ, 
the  Lord  of  glory  (2:1);  he  mentions  those  who 
blasphemed  that  worthy  name  by  which  they  were 
called  (2:7);  and  he  exhorts  them  to  wait  in  pa- 
tience the  advent  of  Christ  (5  : 7).  Besides  it  does 
not  appear  to  have  been  the  custom  of  the  Apostles 
to  write  Epistles  to  those  who  were  not  Christians  ; 
and  if  they  did  so,  it  could  only  be  with  the  inten- 
tion of  converting  them  to  Christianity  ;  but  in  this 
Epistle  no  attempt  at  conversion  is  made."" 

It  had  long  been  the  policy  of  the  various  powers 
that  had  successively  ruled  over  Palestine,  to  send 
out  colonies  of  Jews  in  different  directions.  This 
had  caused  a  great  dispersion  of  them  over  the  then 
known  world.  On  the  day  of  the  Pentecostal  out- 
pouring of  the  Holy  Spirit,  Jews  were  present  in 
Jerusalem  from  fourteen  different  nations.  How  ap- 
propriate it  was  that  the  man  who  stood  at  the  head 
of  the  Jewish  Christians  in  Jerusalem  should  address 
an  Epistle  to  these  scattered  Jews  who  had  become 
believers  !  All  the  facts  of  the  Epistle  support- -this 
idea  that  it  was  to  believing  Tews  outside  of  Pales- 
tine  that  it  was  addressed. 

IV.    The  Occasion  and  Object  of  the  Epistle. 

The  occasion  of  the  Epistle  is  to  be  found  in  the 
condition  of  those  addressed.  They  were  suffering 
persecutions  ;  there  was  more  or  less  of  strife  and 
covetousness  among  them  ;  and  they  were  greatly 
disturbed  by  the  experiences  through  which  they 
were  passing.  These  things  led  James  to  write  the 
Epistle. 

^^Gloag's  Introd.  to  Catholic  Epistles,  p.  45. 


260  THE   CATHOLIC  EPISTLES. 

The  object  of  the  Epistle  may  be  gathered  from 
its  contents.  It  certainly  was  not  polemical  in  doc- 
trinal matters  ;  nor  was  it  political,  for  it  rebukes  a 
revolutionary  spirit  and  protests  against  wars  ;  nor 
was  it  ascetic,  for  it  contains  "  no  denunciations  of 
the  rich  on  account  of  their  riches,  nor  commenda- 
tions of  the  poor  on  account  of  their  poverty."  Its 
design  was  evidently  ethical,  for  wherein  it  partakes 
of  a  polemical  character,  it  is  directed,  not  against 
dogmatic  errors,  but  against  ethical  perversions. 
"Although  there  may  be  a  comparative  want  of 
Christian  dogma,  there  is  no  want  of  Christian  ethics, 
for  there  is  no  writing  of  the  New  Testament  which 
is  more  deeply  pervaded  with  the  moral  teachings  of 
Christ."  It  aims  especially  at  inculcating  an  active 
and  practical  Christianity  in  accordance  with  the 
royal  law  of  love.  "  The  Epistle  is  adapted  to  the 
conditions  of  its  readers.  It  seeks  to  comfort  them 
amid  the  trials  to  which  they  were  exposed,  but 
especially  to  correct  the  errors  of  practice  into 
which  they  had  fallen,  and  to  admonish  them  of  the 
faults  to  which  they  were  addicted.  James  presup- 
poses the  great  truths  and  facts  of  Christianity  as 
known,  and  builds  upon  them  practical  Christianity. 
He  dwells  upon  the  government  of  the  tongue  ;  the 
sin  of  worldliness,  the  observance  of  the  moral  law  ; 
he  shows  the  utter  worthlessness  of  a  faith  which  is 
destitute  of  works  and  of  a  love  which  expends 
itself  in  benevolent  wishes  ;  and  he  inculcates  the 
principles  of  that  pure  and  undefiled  religion  which 
consists  in  doing  good  to  others,  and  in  keeping  our- 
selves pure  in  this  world."  " 

"  Gloag's  Introd.  to  the  Catholic  Epistles,  p.  55. 


JAMES.  261 

"  Tliejiin-ppse/' writes  Canon  Farrar, '*  for  which 
it  was  written  was  to  encourage  the  Jewish  Chris- 
tians to  the  endurance  of  trial  by  stirring  them  up  to 
a  brighter  energy  of  a  holy  living.  And  in  doing 
this  he  neither  urges  a  slavish  obedience  nor  a  terri- 
fied anxiety.  If  he  does  not  dwell,  as  assuredly  he 
does  not,  on  the  specific  Christian  motives,  he  does 
not  at  any  rate  put  in  their  place  a  ceremonial  right- 
eousness. His  ideals  are  the  ideals  of  truth  and  wis- 
dom, not  of  accurate  legality.  The  Law  which  he 
has  in  view  is  not  the  threatful  Law  of  Moses,  which 
gendereth  to  bondage,  but  the  royal  Law,  the  per- 
fect Law  of  liberty,  the  Law  as  it  is  set  forth  in  the 
Sermon  on  the  Mount.  He  is  the  representative,  not 
of  Judaism,  but  of  Christian  Judaism  —  that  is,  of 
Judaism  in  its  transformation    and   transfiguration." 

V,  The  Contents  of  the  Epistle. 

**The  writer  does  not  seem  to  have  set  himself 
down  to  compose  an  essay  or  a  letter  of  which  he 
had  previously  arranged  the  heads  ;  but,  like  one  of 
the  old  prophets,  to  have  poured  out  what  was  upper- 
most in  his  thoughts,  or  closest  to  his  heart,  without 
waiting  to  connect  his  matter,  or  to  throw  bridges 
across  from  subject  to  subject." 

1.  Greeting,     i  :  i. 

2.  On  the  endurance  of  trials.      I  :  2-18. 

3.  On  hearing  and  doing,     i  :  19-27. 

4.  On  respect  of  persons.     2  :  1-13. 

5.  On  the  relation  of  faith  and  works.     2  :  14-26. 

6.  On  the  control  of  the  tongue.     3  :  1-18. 

7.  On  the  evils  of  strife  and  evil  speaking.     4 : 

J-12. 


262  THE   CATHOLIC  EPISTLES. 

8.  On  the  service  of  God  and  mammon.    4:13-17. 

9.  On  coveteousness  and  impatience.      5  :  i-ii. 

10.  On  needless  oaths  and  the  power  of  prayer. 

5  :  12-18. 

11.  Abrupt  conclusion  about  the  glory  of  convert- 

ing sinners.      5  •  I9>  20. 

VL  Date  and  Place  of  Composition. 

The  author  of  this  Epistle  was  martyred  in  the 
year  62  A.  D.  It  is  certain  that  the  letter  must  have 
been  written  before  the  great  Epistles  of  Paul  that 
touch  on  the  doctrines  of  faith  and  justification,  for 
the  writer  would  have  been  more  careful  not  to  come 
into  even  seeming  conflict  with  the  teachings  of  the 
Apostle  Paul  whose  work  he  indorsed  in  the  strong- 
est way  (Gal.  2  : 9,  10).  It  must  also  have  been  writ- 
ten before  the  Council  of  Jerusalem  in  50  A.  D.,  for 
there  is  not  the  slightest  reference  to  the  decisions 
of  that  conference, —  decisions  very  important  in 
their  relation  to  all  Jewish  Christians  as  announcing 
the  verdict  of  the  leaders  of  the  Church  in  regard  to 
the  relation  of  Gentile  Christians  to  the  law.  If  this 
Epistle  had  been  written  after  that  event,  it  would 
doubtless  have  made  some  reference  to  that  Council 
in  which  its  writer  played  such  an  important  part. 
Persecutions  raged  with  great  severity  against  the 
Christians  about  44  A.  D.,  when  James  the  son  of 
Zebedee,  the  Apostle,  was  martyred  (Acts  12  :  i,  2). 
Now  this  Epistle  was  written  while  its  readers  were 
still  suffering  from  persecutions.  In  accordance  with 
these  facts,  we  are  doubtless  right  in  dating  it  about 
45  A.  D.  It  is  consequently  the  earliest  book  of  the 
New  Testament  in  time  of  composition.  It  was  writ- 
ten at  Jerusalem. 


FIRST  PETER.  263 

VII.   The  Peculiarities  of  the  Epistle. 

One  of  the  most  marked  features  of  this  Epistle 
js  its  manifest  dependence  on  the  Sermon  on  the 
Mount.  It  is  saturated  with  the  teachings  of  our 
Lord,  as  set  forth  in  that  sermon.  It  is  true  that 
James  does  not  allude  to  the  external  facts  of  the  life 
of  the  Saviour,  yet  he  speaks  expressly  of  Him,  and 
his  language  "offers  the  most  striking  coincidences 
with  the  language  of  our  Lord's  discourses." 

Another  peculiarity  is  dwelt  upon  by  Dean  How- 
son,  who  writes,  *'  There  is  more  imagery  drawn 
from  mere  natural  phenomena  in  the  one  short 
Epistle  of  St.  James  —  'the  waves  of  the  sea  driven 
with  the  wind  and  tossed  '  (i  :  6),  '  the  flower  of  the 
grass*  (i  :  lo),  'the  sun  risen  with  a  burning  heat' 
(i  :  1 1),  *  the  fierce  winds '  (3  :  4),  '  the  kindling  of  the 
fire'  (3:5)*  'the  beasts,  birds,  and  serpents,  and 
things  in  the  sea '  (3  : 7),  '  the  fig,  olive,  and  vine,  the 
salt  water  and  fresh'  (3:12),  'the  vapor  that  ap- 
peareth  for  a  little  time  and  then  vanisheth  away  ' 
(4:14), 'the  moth-eaten  garment'  (5:2), 'the  rust' 
(5  13), 'the  early  and  latter  rain'  (5  :  7),  'the  earth 
bringing  forth  her  fruit '  (5  :  18) — than  in  all  St.  Paul's 
Epistles  put  together."  '^ 

II.    THE  FIRST   EPISTLE   OF   PETER. 

/.    Canonicity. 

The  first  writer  who  quotes  this  Epistle  by  name 

is   Irenaeus   (175).     Following   him    Tertullian    (190) 

and  Clement  of  Alexandria  (195)   do  the  same,   and 

from  that  time  on  the  Epistle  is  referred  to  by  name 

by  an  increasing  number  of  writers.     Turning  back 

12  The  Character  of  St.  Paul,  p.  8,  note. 


264  THE   CATHOLIC  EPISTLES. 

to  the  earlier  witnesses,  we  find  an  undeniable  refer- 
ence to  it  in  Second  Peter  3  :  i.  Clement  of  Rome 
(96)  repeatedly  quotes  its  language,  and  the  same  is 
true  to  a  certain  extent  of  Polycarp  (116)  and  of  the 
Epistle  to  Diognetus  (117).  The  Testaments  of  the 
Twelve  Patriarchs  (120)  also  doubtless  uses  it.  Pa- 
pias  (120-130)  and  Hermas  (130-150)  make  use  of  it. 
To  these  witnesses  must  also  be  added  the  names  of 
Melito  of  Sardis  (170),  Theophilus  of  Antioch  (168- 
182),  and  the  Letter  of  the  Churches  of  Lyons  and 
Vienne  (177).  Certain  heretical  sects  also  of  the 
first  half  of  the  second  century,  the  Marcosians,  the 
Simonians,  and  the  Basilidians,  used  it.  This  exter- 
nal testimony  is  so  strong  that  Renan  says,  ''This 
First  Epistle  of  Peter  is  one  of  the  writings  of  the 
New  Testament  which  are  most  anciently  and  unani- 
mously cited  as  authentic." 

The  mternal  evidence  of  the  book  points  in  the 
same  way.  It  was  written  before  the  destruction  of 
the  temple  (4 :  17),  and  it  is  evident  that  it  was  ad- 
dressed to  those  who  were  themselves  converts  to 
the  Christian  faith,  and  not  the  children  of  converts. 
The  writer  had  seen  Christ  (5  :  i).  And  a  close  com- 
parison of  the  speeches  attributed  to  Peter  in  the 
Acts  with  this  Epistle  shows  that  the  writer  of  this 
Epistle  was  the  man  who  spoke  those  speeches. 
The  author  of  this  Epistle  had  as  close  acquaint- 
ances Mark  and  Silvanus,  who  are  evidently  the 
same  persons  as  those  thus  named  in  the  Acts^ 
Furthermore  the  Epistle  makes  an  explicit  claim 
to  Petrine  authorship. 

All  of  these  facts  demonstrate  the  right  of  this 
Epistle  to  a  place  in  the  sacred  Canon.     This  was 


FIRST  PETER.  265 

the  unanimous  and  unhesitating  belief  of  the  early 
Church.  The  assaults  that  have  been  made  upon 
this  Epistle  have  been  utterly  powerless  in  the  face 
of  all  this  positive  testimony  to  shake  its  position  in 
^  the  faith  of  the  Church  of  all  ages.  As  a  rule,  thef 
attacks  that  have  been  made  have  been  based  on  thqf 
assumption  of  a  real  and  unreconcilable  hostility  bef 
tween  Peter  and  Paul.  This  assumption  is  absolutely 
without  any  foundation,  for  this  Epistle  proves  on 
the  contrary  that  there  was  a  real  and  substantial 
unity  between  the  two  great  Apostles. 

//.   The  Authorship  of  the  Epistle. 

The  claim  of  the  Epistle  that  it  was  written  by 
Peter,  an  Apostle  of  Jesus  Christ,  is  supported  by  the 
evidence  that  has  already  been  cited,  for  proof  of  its 
canonicity  is  proof  as  well  of  its  genuineness.  By  the 
last  quarter  of  the  second  century  it  was  quoted  all 
over  the  Church  as  the  Epistle  of  Peter.  Weiss  says, 
"We  perceive  that  the  author  was  actually  one  of 
the  primitive  Apostles  from  the  vividness  with  which 
the  image  of  Christ's  innocent  and  suffering  life  is 
before  his  mind  (2  :  21  ff. ;  cf  I  :  19  ;  3  :  18) ;  from  the 
way  in  which  experience  of  the  revolution  wrought 
by  the  resurrection  of  Christ  and  His  exaltation  in 
those  who  witnessed  them,  evidently  lies  at  the  foun- 
dation  of  the  utterances  in  i  :  3,  21  (cf  also  3  :  19  ; 
4:  13  ;  5:1);  from  the  manner  in  which  he  reflects 
on  the  loss  of  those  who  have  not  seen  Jesus  and  yet 
have  loved  Him  (i  :8);  from  the  way  in  which  he 
lives  in  reminiscences  of  the  words  of  Christ,  while 
his  whole  doctrine  is  only  a  testimony,  requiring  no 
medium  of  reflection,  to  the   acts  of  salvation   and 


266  THE   CATHOLIC  EPISTLES. 

their  effects  as  witnessed  by  himself."  ^^  There  can 
be  no  question  of  the  fact  that  the  person  who  wrote 
this  Epistle  was  the  same  person  who  spoke  the 
speeches  attributed  to  Peter  in  the  Acts.  The  lan- 
guage, as  well  as  the  thoughts  of  the  two  proceed 
from  the  same  person.  "The  author  of  this  Epistle 
had  a  young  friend  named  Mark  ;  so  had  Peter  (Acts 
12  :  12).  He  had  a  companion  named  Silvanus  (Si- 
las) ;  so  had  Peter  (cf.  Acts  15  where  Silas  is  a  mes- 
senger of  the  council  of  which  he  was  a  member) ; 
he  had  a  large  acquaintance  with  the  writings  of 
Paul,  with  whose  teachings  he  fully  agrees,  and  this 
was  true  of  Peter,  not  only  according  to  Acts,  but 
also  according  to  the  distinct  statement  of  Paul  him- 
self in  a  letter  admitted  to  be  genuine  (Gal.  I  :  18  ; 
2:2,8,  9).  No  reasonable  doubt  can  exist  as  to  the 
Apostle  Peter's  having  been  the  actual  author  of  this 
Epistle." 

Peter's  real  name  was  Simon  (John  21  :  15).  He 
was  a  native  Galilean  of  Bethsaida.  His  occupation 
was  that  of  a  fisherman.  He  was  a  married  man, 
and  lived  in  Capernaum.  In  business  he  and  his 
brother  Andrew  were  partners  with  John  and  James, 
the  sons  of  Zebedee  (Luke  5  : 7).  Andrew  and  John 
were  led  to  Jesus  by  the  testimony  of  John  the  Bap- 
tist, whose  disciples  they  had  been.  Through  the 
instrumentality  of  Andrew,  Peter  was  on  the  follow- 
ing day  led  to  Christ,  who  gave  to  him  the  name 
Cephas,  an  Aramaic  name  of  which  Peter  (Petros)  is 
the  Greek  translation  (John  1:42).  Peter  by  reason 
of  his  personal  characteristics  became  most  promi- 
nent among  the  disciples  of  Christ.  To  him,  to- 
gether  with    John    and   James,    the    Lord    granted 

13  Weiss'  Manual  of  Introd.  Vol.    II,  p.  147. 


FIRST  PETER.  267 

special  privileges,  such  as  witnessing  the  raising  of 
Jairus'  daughter  and  the  transfiguration  of  Jesus,  and 
they  also  were  taken  farther  into  the  garden  of  Geth- 
semane  on  the  night  of  the  betrayal  than  the  others. 
Peter  was  impulsive  and  out-spoken,  following  too 
often  without  reflection  the  sudden  promptings  of  his 
nature.  To  him,  however,  belongs  the  honor  of  hav- 
ing been  the  first  person  to  confess  Jesus  as  the  Mes- 
siah. Thus  his  ardent  nature  had  its  peculiar 
excellences,  as  well  as  its  serious  defects.  He  failed 
terribly  when  the  test  of  the  night  of  the  Saviour's 
betrayal  and  trial  was  applied  to  him,  and  denied  his 
Master.  And  also  at  Antioch  he  showed  a  vacilla- 
tion of  conduct  that  was  little  in  keeping  with  either 
his  knowledge,  or  his  experience,  or  his  position 
(Gal.  2  :  11-15). 

During  the  public  ministry  of  our  Lord,  after  He 
had  chosen  him  as  one  of  His  Apostles,  Peter  was 
rarely  absent  from  His  side.  His  personal  traits  of 
character  made  him  the  natural  leader  among  the 
disciples,  and  he  generally  acted  as  the  spokesman 
for  them.  The  darkest  page  in  the  life  of  this  man  is 
that  one  on  which  the  story  of  his  denial  of  Christ  is 
written.  But  if  he  sinned  deeply,  he  repented  sin- 
cerely. After  His  resurrection,  the  Saviour  honored 
him  with  a  special  appearance  (Luke  24  :  34  ;  i  Cor. 
15  :  5).  Later  the  Lord  made  emphatic  his  full  resto- 
ration to  his  apostolic  office  (John  21  :  15-17).  In  the 
early  apostolic  history,  Peter  stands  forth  as  the 
most  prominent  figure.  He  was  apparently  the  ac- 
knowledged leader  of  the  Christians,  though  he  pos- 
sessed no  more  authority  than  any  of  the  other 
Apostles.     He  was  the  one  who  acted    as  a  leader 


268  THE   CATHOLIC  EPISTLES. 

in  securing  a  successor  to  Judas  the  betrayer  (Acts 
I  :  15  fif.).  On  the  day  of  Pentecost  it  was  his  voice 
that  heralded  the  gospel  message  with  such  power 
that  three  thousand  souls  were  led  to  Christ.  Active 
in  the  service  of  his  risen  Lord  in  Jerusalem,  he  also 
proclaimed  the  Gospel  in  Samaria.  He  was  the  man 
chosen  of  God  to  open  the  doors  of  the  Church  for 
the  entrance  of  the  Gentiles, —  his  own  words  being, 
"God  made  choice  among  us  that  the  Gentiles  by 
my  mouth  should  hear  the  word  of  the  Gospel  and 
believe"  (Acts  15:7).  When  Herod  Agrippa  saw 
how  the  death  of  James  the  son  of  Zebedee  pleased 
the  Jews,  he  took  steps  also  to  put  an  end  to  Peter's 
career,  but  the  Apostle  was  miraculously  saved  from 
the  impending  danger  (Acts  12).  In  the  council  of 
Jerusalem  (50  A.  D.)  Peter  played  an  important  part, 
advocating  the  free  entrance  of  the  Gentiles  without 
their  being  required  to  conform  to  the  Jewish  rites 
and  ceremonies.  After  that  time,  and  as  Paul  became 
more  prominent  in  the  church  at  large,  and  James 
the  brother  of  our  Lord  became  the  recognized  head 
of  the  mother  church  at  Jerusalem,  Peter  became 
less  prominent,  and  his  name  is  not  mentioned  again 
in  the  Acts. 

There  are  only  a  few  references  to  Peter  in  the 
Epistles  of  Paul.  Paul  visited  him  in  Jerusalem  for 
fifteen  days  (Gal.  i  :  18)  three  years  after  his  conver- 
sion, that  is  about  40  A.  D.  At  Antioch  he  and  Paul 
came  into  collision  with  one  another  because  of  the 
vacillating  conduct  of  the  former  (Gal.  2  :  11).  One 
of  the  factions  in  the  Corinthian  church  assumed  the 
name  of  the  Cephas  party,  deriving  their  name  from 


FIRST  PETER.  269 


Peter,  from  which  some  have  inferred  that  Peter  had 
visited  Corinth  at  some  time.  From  i  Cor.  9  :  5  we 
gather  that  Peter  was  accompanied  on  his  jour- 
neys by  his  wife.  When  the  Apostle  wrote  his  First 
Epistle  he  was  at  Ba.byion  in  the  Euphrates  valley. 
It  is  impossible  to  tell  how  long  he  had  been  there, 
but  it  seems  most  likely  that  he  had  been  there  for 
some  time,  and  that  the  activities  of  his  life  after  the 
Council  of  Jerusalem  were  spent  in  the  East.  His 
Second  Epistle  was  probably  written  at  some  point 
between__^^abxlon_ajid_E^  The  Saviour  had 
prophesied  that  Peter  would  suffer  a  martyr's  death 
(John  21:18),  and  tradition  assigns  Rome  as  the 
place  of  his  martyrdom. 

Tradition  busies  itself  more  with  the  name  of  Peter 
than  that  of  any  of  the  other  Apostles,  but  there  is 
little  dependence  to  be  placed  on  the  bulk  of  its 
stories.  Professor  Warfield  says,  "  In  the  midst  of 
all  this  confusion,  we  can  learn  but  two  facts  as  to 
Peter  from  tradition  :  first,  that  he  suffered  martyr- 
dom by  crucifixion,  and  secondly,  that  the  place  of 
his  death  was  probably  Rome.  That  he  suffered 
martyrdom  and  by  crucifixion  is  indeed  implied  in 
John  21  :  19,  and  is,  so  far  as  the  fact  of  martyrdom 
is  concerned,  adverted  to  by  Clement  of  Rome. 
Then  Dionysius  of  Corinth  declares  that  he  suffered 
about  the  same  time  with  Paul.  So  also  Tertullian, 
Cyprian,  Lactantius,  etc.  Origen  tells  us  that  at  his 
own  desire  he  was  crucified  with  his  head  down- 
wards, which,  however,  may  or  may  not  be  true.  It 
certainly  is  impossible  to  doubt  the  main  fact,  how- 
ever, that  Peter  died  by  crucifixion." 


270  THE    CATHOLIC  EPISTLES. 

Writing  of  Peter's  character,  Professor  Gloag  says  : 
**  He  excelled  all  the  Apostles  in  zeal,  boldness,  and 
impetuosity.  Naturally  sanguine  and  impulsive,  he 
was  ever  ready  to  come  forward  and  take  the  lead. 
Ardent  in  his  attachment  to  the  Lord,  it  was  no  vain 
boast,  but  the  expression  of  deep  affection,  when  he 
declared  his  willingness  to  die  for  Him.  But  like 
most  impulsive  men,  he  was  deficient  in  steadiness, 
and  on  two  occasions  he  showed  a  want  of  moral 
courage.  Of  all  the  Apostles  Peter  appears  the 
most  human,  the  most  liable  to  be  affected  with  the 
frailties  and  infirmities  of  humanity  ;  and  this  human 
element  of  his  character,  ennobled  as  it  was  by  high 
aspiration  and  aims,  renders  him  attractive  and  lov- 
able. He  had  not  the  calm  contemplativeness  of 
John,  nor  the  spiritual  insight  and  moral  grandeur  of 
Paul,  and  was  better  fitted  for  the  task  of  founding 
than  that  of  building  up  the  Church."  ^* 

///.    The  Persons  Addressed. 

The  Epistle  is  addressed  **  to  the  strangers  through- 
out Pontus,  Galatia,  Cappadocia,  Asia,  and  Bithynia." 
The  Revised  Version  translates  the  original  more 
correctly  and  renders  it,  **  to  the  elect,  who  are  so- 
journers of  the  Dispersion."  The  question  that  nat- 
urally arises  is  in  regard  to  the  meaning  of  the  term 
"Dispersion"  in  this  place.  James  in  his  Epistle 
unquestionably  uses  it  with  reference  to  the  Jews. 
Does  Peter  have  the  same  limitation  in  mind  .^  This 
was  the  understanding  for  a  long  time,  and  it  seems 
at  first  sight  to  mean  the  Jewish  Christians  in  the 
countries  named,  but  a  closer  study  of  the  Epistles 

i*Gloa§^'s  Introd.  to  Catholic  Epistles,  p.  124. 


FIRST  PETER.  271 

has  led  most  scholars  to  regard  the  term  as  used 
metaphorically  here  for  all  believers,  whether  Tews  or 
Gentiles.  Despite  the  fact  that  Peter  was  the  recog- 
nized Apostle  to  the  circumcision,  and  that  the  Old 
Testament  is  frequently  quoted  in  this  Epistle,  it 
must  be  acknowledged  that  4  : 3  points  to  Gentile 
readers.  Then  we  know  that  the  churches  of  the 
regions  named,  while  containing  some  Jews,  were 
yet  predominatingly  Gentile  in  their  composition. 
The  Epistle  is  consequently  addressed  to  all  believ- 
ers in  the  special  regions  named  in  the  salutation. 
Canon  Cook  writes:  "In  short,  the  general  tone  and 
special  injunctions  equally  justify  the  conclusion  at 
which  the  majority  of  modern  commentators  have 
arrived,  that  so  far  from  having  Israelites  exclusively 
before  his  mind,  the  large-minded  baptizer  of  Corne- 
lius gave  his  deepest  and  most  earnest  thought  to  a 
body  in  which  there  is  neither  Jew  nor  Gentile,  in 
which  Christ  is  all  in  all."  '^ 

IV.    The  Occasion  and  Object  of  the  Epistle. 

Peter  had  evidently  received  some  very  recent 
information  in  regard  to  the  condition  of  the  Chris- 
tians to  whom  he  writes.  Now  it  was  doubtless  to 
Mark  that  the  Apostle  owed  his  information,  for  that 
evangelist  was  with  him  when  he  wrote  this  Epistle. 
In  Col.  4 :  10  Paul  enjoined  the  Colossians  to  receive 
Mark,  if  he  came  to  them.  From  this  we  infer  that 
Mark  had  then  in  prospect  a  trip  to  Asia  Minor. 
From  thence  he  went  on  to  Babylon  to  Peter,  giving 
him  a  full  account  of  the  Churches  he  had  visited 
while  in  Asia  Minor.  This  account  led  Peter  to  con- 
1^  Bible  Commentary,  Introd,  to  i  Peter. 


272  THE   CATHOLIC  EPISTLES. 

ceive  the  plan  of  communicating  with  those  Chris- 
tians, in  order  that  he  might  give  them  his  advice. 
It  is  probable  that  Mark's  report  led  Silvanus  (Silas) 
to  desire  to  go  to  the  regions  described,  and  conse- 
quently he  became  not  only  the  amanuensis  of  the 
Apostle,  but  also  the  bearer  of  the  letter  to  its  des- 
tination. 

The  object  of  the  Epistle  is  stated  in  the  words, 
"  By  Silvanus  a  faithful  brother  unto  you,  as  I  sup- 
pose, I  have  written  briefly,  exhorting  and  testifying 
that  this  is  the  true  grace  of  God  wherein  ye  stand." 
According  to  these  words,  his  object  was  twofold, 
namely,  to  exhort  and  to  testify.  The  hortatory 
character  of  the  Epistle  is  its  predominating  feature. 
The  primary  object  of  the  Apostle,  then,  was  to  ex- 
hort them  to  stand  fast  in  the  face  of  the  trials  and 
temptations  to  which  they  were  exposed.  Along  the 
line  of  the  secondary  object  of  the  Epistle,  that  of 
testifying,  **  this  Epistle  is  Peter's  publication  of  his 
agreement  with  the  Apostle  Paul,  and  his  reply  to 
the  misrepresentations  of  the  Judaizers,  who  were 
using  his  name  to  undermine  the  faith  of  the  Chris- 
tians of  that  region." 

V,    The  Contents  of  the  Epistle, 

Inasmuch  as  it  partakes  of  the  usual  freedom  of 
an  epistolary  communication  in  its  construction,  this 
Epistle  is  not  capable  of  formal  divisions.  The  fol- 
lowing, however,  will  indicate  the  general  outline  of 
its  contents:  — 

I.  Salutation,     i  :  i,  2. 

II.  Thanksgiving  for  the  blessings  of  the  plan  of 
salvation,     i  :  3-12. 


FIRST  PETER,  273 

III.  The  Main  Portion,  consisting  of  various  ex- 
hortations.    I  :  13-5  19. 

1.  To  earnest  Christian  living,  founded  on  the 

hope  of  glory.     I  :  13-2  :  10. 
(^.)  To  a  holy  walk  in  the  fear  of  God. 

I  :  13-21. 
(^.)  To  brotherly  love,     i  :  22-25. 
( ^. )  To  growth  in  their  lives  as  the  people 

of  God.     2  :  i-io. 

2.  Special  directions  as  to  the  duties  of  various 

classes  of  people.     2:11-4:6. 
(«.)  Christians  to  unbelievers.     2:11,  12. 
(<5.)  Christians  to  civil  rulers.     2  :  13-17. 
(^.)  Servants  to  their  masters.    2:  18-25. 
(^. )  Wives  to  their  husbands.     3  :  1-6. 
(^.)  Husbands  to  their  wives.     3  :  7. 
(/.)  Christians  to  one  another.     3  :  8-12. 
(^.)  Christians  in  persecution.     3  :  13-4:6. 

3.  Special  exhortations.     4:7-5:9. 

(^.)  To   the  practice   of  Christian   graces. 

4:7-11. 
(^.)  To  joyful  bearing  of  suffering  as  Chris^ 

tians.     4  :  12-19. 
(^.)  To  elders  to  do  their  duty.     5  :  1-4. 
(^.)  To  the  young.     5  :  5. 
(^. )  To  humility  and  watchfulness  of  life. 

5  :6^. 

IV.  Concluding  Portion.     5  :  10-14. 

1.  Benediction.     5  :  10,  11. 

2.  The   object    and    bearer    of    the    Epistle. 

5:  12. 

3.  The  closing  salutations.     5  :  13,  14. 

18 


274  THE  CATHOLIC  EPISTLES, 

VI.    The  Date  and  Place  of  Composition, 

This  Epistle  must  have  been  written  before  the 
destruction  of  Jerusalem  and  the  temple  (4 :  17). 
And  its  evident  dependence  on  Paul's  Epistle  to 
the  Ephesians  forbids  our  dating  it  before  the  time 
of  the  composition  of  that  Pauline  Epistle.  The 
date  of  Peter's  death  was  probably  68  A.  D.  These 
facts  necessitate  dating  it  at  some  time  between  63 
and  6%  A.  D.  Mark  and  Silas  were  with  the  Apostle 
when  he  wrote,  and  the  letter  was  sent  to  its  des- 
tination by  the  hand  of  Silas.  It  has  been  noted 
that  Mark  was  preparing  for  a  visit  to  Asia  Minor, 
that  is,  early  in  63  A.  D.  (Col.  4:  10).  The  next  ref- 
erence to  Mark  by  Paul  is  in  his  Second  Epistle  to 
Timothy,  where  he  urges  Timothy  to  bring  Mark 
with  him  from  Asia  Minor,  that  is,  early  in  6S  A.  D. 
Now  Mark  might  have  been  with  Peter  during  this 
interim.  The  probable  truth  is  that  Mark  left  Paul 
in  Rome  early  in  63  A.  D.,  and  visited  Asia  Minor  in 
accordance  with  the  intimation  of  Col.  4  :  10.  There 
he  found  the  condition  of  the  churches  to  be  quite 
critical,  and  on  joining  Peter  at  Babylon,  he  in- 
formed him  of  their  condition,  at  the  same  time  giv- 
ing him  copies  of  some  of  Paul's  Epistles,  Ephesians 
and  Romans,  if  not  others.  Immediately  Peter 
wrote  this  Epistle,  sending  it  by  Silas.  This  latter 
name  does  not  help  us  at  all  in  determining  the 
date,  as  there  is  no  reference  to  him  after  53  A.  D., 
when  he  was  in  Corinth  with  Paul.  According  to 
these  facts,  we  date  this  Epistle  during  the  year  64 
A.  D.  The  place  of  composition  has  been  mentioned. 
This  must  certainly  have  been  Babylon  in  the  Eu- 


FIRST  PETER,  275 

phrates  valley.  "The  church  that  Is  at  Babylon, 
elected  together  with  you,  saluteth  you."  The 
words  ** church  that  is"  are  supplied  in  the  Author- 
ized Version,  not  being  in  the  original.  Now  what- 
ever words  are  to  be  supplied,  whether  these  or 
others,  it  is  plain  that  the  simplest  understanding  is 
that  it  was  written  from  Babylon.  But  some  assert 
that  by  Babylon  the  Apostle  really  means  Rome, 
since  that  name  was  applied  to  the  eternal  city  in 
the  Revelation.  But  there  is  no  evidence  that  at 
the  time  of  the  writing  of  this  Epistle  that  term  was 
in  common  use  as  applied  to  Rome.  We  cannot  un- 
derstand why  Peter  should  use  a  symbolical  term  in 
the  midst  of  salutations  and  directions.  The  tradi- 
tion that  Peter  was  the  bishop  of  the  Roman  church 
for  twenty-five  years  is  rejected  by  the  majority  of 
scholars.  That  he  died  a  martyr  at  Rome  in  68 
A.  D.,  cannot  be  doubted,  but  without  question  he 
could  not  have  been  long  in  that  city,  as  Paul  would 
certainly  have  referred  to  him  in  some  of  his  letters 
written  from  Rome.  It  has  also  been  objected  to 
Babylon  as  the  place  of  the  composition  of  this  Epis- 
tle, that  at  this  time  there  were  few  Jews  residing 
there,  because  of  persecutions  of  Caligula  in  that 
region  before  41  A.  D.,  and  a  plague  that  raged  there 
in  46  A.  D.  As  a  matter  of  fact,  however,  Babylon 
was  the  center  of  the  Eastern  Dispersion.  And  it 
is  also  interesting  to  note  that  the  places  mentioned 
in  this  Epistle  are  given  in  the  order  in  which  one 
would  come  to  them  in  traveling  from  Babylon  to 
Rome.  In  connection  with  many  writers,  we  may  con- 
fidently assume  that  Babylon  in  the  Euphrates  valley 
was  the  place  of  the  composition  of  this  Epistle. 


276  THE  CATHOLIC  EPISTLES, 

VII.  Peculiarities  of  this  Epistle, 

Writers  generally  have  remarked  on  the  manifest 
parallelisms  between  this  Epistle  and  other  Epistles, 
especially  Romans  and  Ephesians.  Some  have  used 
this  as  the  basis  of  attack  upon  the  Petrine  Epistles, 
alleging  that  they  show  so  much  dependence  that 
they  are  really  not  worthy  of  an  Apostle.  In  regard 
to  this  the  words  of  Davidson  may  be  well  noted. 
He  says :  **  The  Apostles  were  imbued  with  one 
Spirit.  The  source  of  their  enlightenment  was  the 
same.  Their  minds  were  informed  by  the  same  Al- 
mighty power.  Hence,  amid  constitutional  diversi- 
ties, they  exhibited  substantial  unity  of  doctrine, 
aim,  and  purpose.  Their  ideas  regarding  the  funda- 
mental verities  of  Christ's  religion  were  the  same, 
because  they  were  animated  by  the  Holy  Ghost,  who, 
according  to  the  promise  of  the  Son,  was  to  lead 
them  into  all  truth.  Certain  great  ideas  were  de- 
posited within  them  by  the  Holy  Ghost,  in  whose 
evolution  they  evinced  essential  unity  amid  individ- 
ual varieties."  ^^ 

And  in  regard  to  the  relation  of  the  writings  of 
Peter  to  those  of  Paul,  the  same  writer  says  :  "  Paul 
had  developed  the  whole  scheme  of  Christianity  with 
a  fullness  which  none  of  the  other  Apostles  had  ex- 
hibited. He  had  dug  a  wide  channel  of  phraseology 
for  the  great  ideas  of  Christianity,  which  had  become 
their  prevailing  vehicle.  He  had  moulded  and 
shaped  the  distinguishing  doctrines  by  his  preaching 
and  writing.  Was  it  not  natural,  then,  that  Peter, 
composing  one  short  Epistle,  should  involuntarily  fall 

« Davidson's  Introd.,  ist.  Ed.,  Vol.  Ill,  p.  382. 


SECOND  PETER.  277 

into  some  coincidences  of  idea  and  expression  ?  And 
it  was  all  the  more  natural  that  his  Epistle  should 
present  a  kind  of  parallelism  to  Paul's,  since  he  was 
addressing  churches  reared  by  the  latter  and  his 
fellow-laborers,  to  which  he  himself  stood  in  no  inti- 
mate relation.  Propagators  of  error  had  endeavored 
to  draw  them  away  from  attachment  to  the  Pauline 
doctrine,  representing  it  to  be  contrary  to  Peter's. 
In  giving  his  sanction  therefore  to  the  creed  and 
principles  of  his  fellow-apostle,  he  would  more  read- 
ily write  in  language  similar  at  times,  as  he  meant  to 
utter  similar  ideas."  " 

III.      THE  SECOND  EPISTLE  OF  PETER. 
/.   Canonicity, 

It  must  be  acknowledged  at  the  outset  that  we  do 
not  have  nearly  as  strong  external  testimony  to  this 
Second  Epistle  as  to  the  First.  With  perhaps  the 
exception  of  Philemon  and  Third  John,  there  is  the 
least  attestation  to  it  of  all  the  books  of  the  New 
Testament.  In  consequence  of  this,  it  has  been  very 
much  assailed  by  many  writers.  Because  of  this 
fact,  the  evidence  must  be  examined  with  great  care. 

Instead  of  taking  up  first  the  earliest  witnesses, 
we  will  begin  later  in  the  history  and  trace  this  sub- 
ject backwards.  Origen  (230),  as  all  admit,  had  this 
Epistle,  for  he  not  only  quotes  it  by  name,  but  also 
ascribes  it  to  Peter,  carefully  distinguishing  it  from 
his  First  Epistle.  His  use  of  this  Epistle  shows  that 
he  regarded  it  as  of  scriptural  authority.  It  is  true 
that  he  records  the  fact  that  doubts  had  existed  as 
"lb.,  p. 383. 


278  THE  CATHOLIC  EPISTLES, 

to  its  genuineness,  but  he  does  not  at  all  seem  to 
participate  in  these  doubts  himself.  Origen's  pos- 
session of  this  book  presupposes  that  Clement  of 
Alexandria,  his  teacher,  had  it  also.  Nor  are  we  left 
merely  to  infer  this,  for  we  have  it  from  Eusebius, 
and  he  is  supported  by  Cassiodorus  and  Photius, 
that  this  Clement  wrote  a  commentary  on  it.  Such 
a  fact  as  this  is  sufficient  to  place  its  date  at  least  as 
early  as  the  middle  of  the  second  century.  The 
extensive  knowledge  of  Clement,  who  professes  to 
have  traveled  over  the  Christian  world  and  to  have 
known  the  opinions  of  Christians  of  every  part  of 
the  Church,  adds  great  weight  in  favor  of  the  ca- 
nonical authority  of  this  Epistle. 

Taking  another  step  backward  in  the  history,  we 
find  traces  in  Irenseus  of  i  :  15  and  2  : 4-7.  The  as- 
sertion that  there  are  evident  traces  of  these  pas- 
sages in  Irenseus  is  based  upon  the  fact  that  he 
makes  the  same  peculiar  use  of  the  expressions  in 
them.  Theophilus  of  Antioch  (168-182)  very  prob- 
ably quotes  two  passages  from  this  Epistle  ;  while 
Melito  of  Sardis  (170)  likewise  shows  his  depend- 
ence on  it  in  one  of  his  Syriac  works. 

Going  back  still  further,  we  next  meet  with  very 
probable  references  in  Hermas  (140-150)  to  it.  And 
in  regard  to  Justin  Martyr  (145),  it  may  be  said  with 
certainty  that  he  had  it,  for  he  speaks  of  certain  false 
teachers,  of  whom  the  Lord  had  forewarned  His  fol- 
lowers ;  and  in  no  place  but  Second  Peter  2  :  i  can 
this  forewarning  be  found.  This  makes  it  evident 
that  Justin  regarded  this  Epistle  as  authority  on  the 
Lord's  teachings.  Judging  from  the  usage  of  rare 
words,  we  may  also  be  confident  that  the  Testaments 


SECOND  PETER.  279 

of  the  Twelve  Patriarchs  (120)  is  dependent  on  this 
book.  Barnabas  (106)  makes  verbal  use  of  this  Epis- 
tle as  an  authoritative  source.  And  we  may  find 
traces  in  Clement  of  Rome  (96)  which  raise  a  pre- 
sumption in  favor  of  his  recognition  of  this  letter. 

Gathering  all  of  these  together,  it  seems  as  though 
we  could  certainly  affirm  that  before  the  time  of 
Clement  of  Alexandria,  it  was  in  the  possession  of 
Irenaeus,  Justin  Martyr,  and  Barnabas.  It  is  also  to 
be  remembered  that  this  Epistle  finally  acquired 
authority  throughout  the  whole  Church.  Not  one 
particle  of  evidence  can  be  produced  that  shows 
that  it  was  ever  refused  a  place  in  the  Canon  of  the 
Byzantine,  Alexandrian,  or  Western  Church.  In  the 
Syrian  Church  alone  does  it  seem  to  have  been 
denied  a  place  in  the  Canon  ;  but  even  in  that  case 
it  is  possible  to  show  that  it  was  rejected  on  internal 
grounds,  and  then  only  in  the  fourth  century.  Pro- 
fessor Warfield  writes  :  "  It  cannot  be  denied,  there- 
fore, that  it  was  a  part  of  the  Church  Canon  of  the 
early  third  century  ;  and  the  evidence  goes  further 
and  proves  that  it  was  naturally  in  the  Canon  at  this 
time  —  that  the  men  of  the  early  third  century  did 
not  put  it  in,  but  found  it  in  the  Canon.  It  was, 
therefore,  in  the  Canon  of  the  later  years  of  the 
second  century.  .  .  .  But  it  was  commented  on  by 
Clement  of  Alexandria,  and  has  a  place  in  both  the 
Egyptian  versions,  and  in  the  early  form  of  the 
Peshito  (Syriac),  all  of  which  date  from  the  second 
century.  .  .  .  Known  all  over  the  Church  at  this 
period  and  securely  fixed  in  the  Canon,  we  find  it 
quoted  here  and  there,  back  to  the  very  earliest 
Christian   writers ;    nay,  Justin   Martyr,   before    147 


280  THE   CATHOLIC  EPISTLES. 

A.  D.,  quotes  it  in  such  a  way  as  to  prove  that  he 
esteemed  it  authoritative.  .  .  .  Surely  the  presump- 
tion of  its  canonicity  amounts  to  a  moral  certainty,"^' 
The  examination  of  the  internal  evidence  to  the 
authenticity  of  this  Epistle  is  inseparable  from  the 
consideration  of  its  authorship.  The  Epistle  claims 
to  be  by  "  Simon  Peter,  a  servant  and  an  apostle  of 
Jesus  Christ."  If  this  claim  is  true,  it  follows,  as  a 
matter  of  course,  that  it  is  an  authoritative  book  of 
Scripture.  And  as  we  examine  the  book,  we  find 
that  there  are  reminiscences  of  scenes  that  we  know 
Peter  witnessed.  Thus  Peter  was  one  of  the  eye- 
witnesses of  the  transfiguration  of  Christ,  and  the 
writer  of  this  Epistle  refers  to  that  event  in  such  a 
graphic  way  that  it  can  leave  no  doubt  in  our  minds 
but  that  he  personally  witnessed  that  marvelous 
scene.  Undoubtedly,  also,  the  prediction  of  Christ 
about  Peter's  death,  recorded  in  John  21  :  18,  is  the 
reference  of  i  :  14.  Furthermore,  there  is  even 
greater  similarity  between  Second  Peter  and  the 
speeches  of  Peter  in  Acts,  than  between  First  Peter 
and  the  same.  Besides  this  there  are  resemblances 
between  this  Epistle  and  the  First  that  are  so  marked 
as  to  prove  similarity  of  authorship.  The  relation 
of  the  writer  of  these  Epistles  to  Paul  is  the  same  in 
both  cases.  Thus  in  First  Peter  Paul  is  quoted,  and 
in  Second  Peter  his  letters  are  endorsed  by  name. 
Then  the  two  Epistles  are  dependent ;  First  Peter 
on    Romans  and   Ephesians,    and    Second   Peter   on 

18  For  a  masterly  defense  of  the  Canonicity  and  Genuineness  of  this 
Epistle,  see  Professor  Warfield's  articles  in  the  Southern  Presbyterian 
Review  of  January,  1882,  and  April,  1883. 


SECOND  PETER.  281 

Jude.  There  are  also  many  words  that  are  common 
to  the  two  Epistles. 

In  the  assaults  that  have  been  made  on  this 
Second  Epistle,  a  prominent  one  is  based  on  the  as- 
serted linguistic  differences  between  it  and  the  First 
Epistle.  But  we  may  dismiss  this  objection  with  a 
concession  from  Reuss,  who  says:  "We  lay  no  stress 
on  the  linguistic  differences  between  the  two  Epistles 
which  modern  criticism  has  emphasized  too  much. 
The  two  Epistles  are  too  short,  have  to  do  with 
wholly  different  circumstances,  and  there  are  no 
direct  contradictions  to  be  found.  Only  when  spuri- 
ousness  has  been  proved  on  other  grounds  may  this 
point  be  taken  into  account."  The  Epistle  has  also 
been  assailed  because  of  its  evident  dependence  on 
Jude,  an  Epistle  which,  it  is  claimed  by  the  objectors, 
is  not  genuine.  But  we  dissent  from  this  verdict 
against  Jude,  claiming,  as  the  evidence  will  show, 
that  it  is  a  genuine  Epistle,  and  if  so,  there  is  no 
ground  for  attack  on  Second  Peter  if  it  is  dependent 
on  Jude. 

The  relation  of  this  Epistle  to  the  Gospel  accord- 
ing to  Mark  is  very  interesting.  "  All  antiquity  tells 
us  that  Mark  wrote  down  what  Peter  orally  taught 
of  the  Lord's  life  and  teaching.  In  First  Peter  5  :  13, 
we  find  Mark  on  intimate  terms  with  Peter.  Now  in 
Second  Peter  1:15,  the  author  promises  his  readers 
that  he  will  see  to  it  that  they  shall  be  in  a  position 
after  his  death  to  have  his  teaching  always  in  re- 
membrance, and  in  this  he  has  especial  reference  to 
the  facts  of  Christ's  life,  witnessed  to  by  him,  as  is 
proved  by  the  purpose  which  he  expresses  for  so  ar- 


282  THE   CATHOLIC  EPISTLES. 

ranging,  namely,  that  they  may  know  that  they  have 
not  followed  cunningly  devised  fables,  but  facts  au- 
toptically  witnessed.  Surely  this  seems  to  promise  a 
gospel.  And  we  have  this  series  :  First  Peter  testifies 
to  Mark's  intimacy  with  Peter  ;  Second  Peter  prom- 
ises a  Petrine  Gospel ;  antiquity  tells  us  that  Mark 
was  but  Peter's  mouthpiece.  Who  could  have  in- 
vented that  middle  term,  and  so  delicately  inserted 
it  into  Second  Peter }  Second  Peter  thus  appears  a 
link  in  a  natural  chain  which  is  complete  with  it,  and 
incomplete  without  it.  All  three  of  these  sources  from 
which  the  links  are  drawn  are  therefore  genuine."  ^^ 

Taking  all  these  things  into  consideration  we  may 
feel  confident  that  this  is  a  genuine  Epistle  of  Peter, 
having  a  right  to  a  place  in  the  sacred  Canon.  The 
fact  that  the  book  itself  won  its  way  into  the  Canon, 
and  finally  became  a  fixed  part  of  it,  is  worthy  of 
special  note.  It  is  true  that  individuals  still  are 
doubtful  about  its  canonical  authority  ;  but  taking 
the  evidence  as  it  stands,  it  does  not  seem  to  many 
scholars,  and  to  the  Church  at  large,  that  there  is 
any  real  reason  for  their  rejection  of  it. 

//.   To   Whom   Written. 

This  Epistle  is  addressed  "  to  them  that  have  ob- 
tained like  precious  faith  with  us."  This  address  is 
very  general  indeed.  It  is,  however,  narrowed  some- 
what by  the  words  of  3  :  i,  which  assume  that  it  is 
addressed  to  the  same  readers  as  the  First  Epistle 
was.  The  writer  says,  "  This  second  epistle,  be- 
loved, I  now  write  unto  you."  From  this  narrower 
designation,  it  is  evident  that  the  Epistle  was  meant 

^^  Warfield  in  Southern  Pres.  Rev.^  January,  1882,  p.  68. 


SECOND  PETER.  283 

primarily  for  the  same  circle  of  believers  addressed 
in  the  First  Epistle,  that  is,  £ar  the  Christians  of  Asia 
Minor.  The  "we"  of  i  :  i6  does  not  necessarily- 
mean  that  Peter  had  personally  made  known  the 
truth  to  those  to  whom  he  writes.  *'  The  body  to 
which  Peter  belonged,  that  of  the  Apostles  and 
evangelists,  is  meant  here  by  '  we,'  some  of  whom, 
and  therefore  the  body  itself,  had  preached  in  Asia 
Minor."  The  Revised  Version  very  correctly  reads 
in  3  :  2,  **the  commandment  of  the  Lord  and  Saviour 
through  your  apostles,"  instead  of  the  rendering  of 
the  Authorized  Version,  which  reads,  **  of  us  the 
apostles." 

///.    The  Occasion  and  Object  of  this  Epistle, 

The  occasion  of  the  writing  of  this  Epistle  waS 
undoubtedly  the  information  that  Peter  had  received 
of  some  new  outbreak  of  heresy  among  the  Chris- 
tians to  whom  he  had  written  his  First  Epistle.  The 
heretics  had  become  more  active  in  the  dissemina- 
tion of  their  poisonous  teachings.  "We  gather  that 
they  were  denying  even  Christ  that  bought  them, 
that  is.  His  divinity  (2  :  i),  as  well  as  the  promise  of 
His  second  coming  (2  :  i  ff.).  In  their  practice  they 
slandered  God's  mode  of  righteousness  (2  :  2),  and 
they  denied  the  majesty  of  Christ  (2  :  10).  They 
threw  disgrace  on  their  profession  of  Christian  lib- 
erty (2  :  19),  and  lived  a  degraded  life  (2  :  13).  They 
also  seduced  the  unstable  with  their  own  mode  of 
life  (2  :  14-18),  and  naturally  enough  were  ripe  for 
destruction  (2  :  12,  19,  20)." 

The  Apostle's  design  is  given  in  3  :  1-3,  and  3  : 
17,  18.     It  was  twofold  ;  namely,  first,  to  warn  them 


284  THE  CATHOLIC  EPISTLES. 

against  the  false  teachers,  and,  second,  to  exhort 
his  readers  to  be  progressive  in  holiness,  to  "grow 
in  grace,  and  in  the  knowledge  of  our  Lord  and 
Saviour  Jesus  Christ."  The  practical  outcome  of 
the  doctrinal  teachings  of  the  heretics  was  mani- 
fest in  vicious  and  sinful  living.  It  was  to  coun- 
teract this  effect  that  the  Apostle  writes  as  he  does. 
The  whole  Epistle  is  practically  a  plea  for  holiness 
of  life. 

IV,   Outline  of  the  Epistle. 

1.  Apostolic  address  and  greeting.     1:1,2. 

2.  Earnest  exhortation  to  growth  in  grace  and 
Christian  knowledge,     i  :  3-1 1. 

3.  Reminder  of  the  ground  on  which  their  knowl- 
edge rests.     I  :  12-21. 

4.  Warning  against,  and  denunciation  of,  the  false 
teachers.     2  :  1-22. 

5.  Reminder  of  the  character  and  surety  of  the 
teachings  that  had  been  given  them  as  to  the  second 
advent  and  the  end  of  the  world.     3  :  1-13. 

6.  Concluding  exhortation  to  make  their  calling 
and  election  sure,  including  a  recommendation  of 
Paul's  Epistles,  closing  with  a  doxology.     3  :  14-18. 

V.  Date  and  Place  of  Composition. 

This  Epistle  must  have  been  written  before  the 
Apostle's  death  in  6%  A.  D.  Its  dependence  on  Jude 
necessitates  its  being  dated  after  the  time  of  com- 
position of  that  Epistle,  that  is,  after  64  A.  D.  It  is 
certain,  however,  that  it  was  not  written  long  before 
the  death  of  the  Apostle,  for  it  is  apparent  that  he 
was  anticipating  that  event  before  long  (i  :  14).     On 


SECOND  PETER,  285 

the  other  hand  it  could  not  have  been  written  very- 
soon  after  the  First  Epistle,  judging-  from  a  com- 
parison between  the  two.  Accordingly  we  must 
place  it  as  late  as  possible  in  the  life  of  Peter,  and 
date  it  early  in^^62^A.  D. 

There  is  no  possibility  of  certainly  ascertaining 
the  place  of  its  composition.  The  First  Epistle  was 
written  at  Babylon,  and  this  one  was  probably 
written  at  some  point  between^Babylop  r^r^d  T?r>m^ 
There  are  those  who  hold  that  it  was  written  in 
Rome,  but  it  is  probable  that  Peter  came  there  as 
a  prisoner,  and  there  is  no  evidence  of  his  being  a 
prisoner  when  he  wrote  this  Epistle. 

VI .  Peculiarities  of  this  Epistle, 

There  are  some  real  distinctive  features  about 
this  Epistle  as  compared  with  the  First.  In  the  First 
the  keynote  was  'Hope':  in  this  it  is  'Knowledge.' 
Comparing  them.  Dr.  Gloag  writes  :  "  The  Epistles 
were  written  with  different  purposes,  the  First  being 
chiefly  hortatory,  and  the  Second  polemical.  The 
First  was  written  with  a  design  to  comfort  believers 
under  the  persecutions  to  which  they  were  exposed  ; 
and  the  Second  to  warn  them  against  the  errors  of 
false  teachers.  Hence  in  the  First  Epistle,  the  au- 
thor dwelt  upon  the  example  of  the  sufferings  of 
Christ  to  encourage  believers  in  trial ;  whereas  there 
was  not  the  same  necessity  in  the  Second  Epistle. 
And  hence,  also,  hope  was  the  keynote  of  the  First 
Epistle,  because  its  purpose  was  to  sustain  believers 
in  suffering ;  and  knowledge  was  the  keynote  of  the 
Second  Epistle,  because  its  purpose  was  to  establish 
them  in  the  faith.     But  in  both  Epistles  the  sanguine 


286  THE   CATHOLIC  EPISTLES, 

and  hopeful  spirit  of  the  Apostle  is  apparent ;  in  the 
Second,  as  well  as  in  the  First,  the  author  leads  for- 
ward the  thoughts  of  his  readers  to  the  entrance  that 
shall  be  ministered  to  them  abundantly  into  the  ever- 
lasting kingdom  of  our  Lord  and  Saviour  Jesus  Christ 
(2  Pet.  I  :  11)  ;  in  the  Second,  as  well  as  in  the  First, 
Peter  is  the  Apostle  of  Hope."  '''' 

IV.   THE   FIRST   EPISTLE   OF  JOHN. 

/.  Canonicity. 

The  external  testimony  in  favor  of  this  Epistle  is 
strong  as  could  be  desired.  There  are  apparent  evi- 
dences of  its  influence  in  Clement  of  Rome  (96)  and 
Ignatius  (115).  Its  use  by  Polycarp  (116)  is  unques- 
tionable, and  we  have  the  testimony  of  Eusebius  that 
Papias  (120)  also  used  it.  The  writers  of  the  Teach- 
ing of  the  Twelve  Apostles  (115)  and  the  Testa- 
ments of  the  Twelve  Patriarchs  (120)  show  their 
acquaintance  with  it.  It  is  found  in  all  the  early 
Versions,  as  well  as  in  all  catalogues  and  manu- 
scripts. The  Muratori  Canon  (170)  speaks  of  it  in 
connection  with  the  Gospel  according  to  John. 
And  it  is  to  be  noted  that  the  use  of  it  by  Polycarp 
and  Papias,  both  of  whom  were  disciples  of  John, 
affords  the  most  positive  testimony  to  its  canonical 
authority.  And  to  these  two  names  must  be  added 
that  of  Irenseus,  the  pupil  of  Polycarp,  who  uses  it 
repeatedly,  ascribing  it  to  the  Apostle  John.  The 
concurrent  testimony  of  these  three  men  is  sufficient 
to  establish  its  canonicity,  for  they  form  a  direct 
chain  of  connection  with  the  Apostle  to  whom  by  all 
^'Gloag's  Introd.  to  the  Catholic  Epistles,  p.  217. 


FIRST  JOHN,  287 

antiquity  this  Epistle  is  ascribed.  Lucke  says  :  "  In- 
controvertibly,  our  Epistle  must  be  numbered  among 
the  canonical  books  which  are  most  strongly  upheld 
by  ecclesiastical  tradition."  And  to  this  the  words  of 
DeWette  may  be  added,  who  says  :  "The  doubts 
which  have  been  raised  in  recent  times  against  the 
genuineness  of  this  Epistle  rest  on  weak  grounds." 

Turning  to  the  internal  evidence,  we  find  that  its 
voice  is  none  the  less  clear  and  strong  in  the  same 
line.  Its  author  must  have  been  an  eye-witness  of 
the  life  of  Christ,  for  otherwise  he  could  not  have 
written  as  he  did  (i  :  1-4  ;  4  :  14).  He  had  touched 
the  Lord  (1:1);  had  been  a  constant  hearer  of  Jesus* 
teaching  (1:3);  and  had  seen  His  manifested  glory 
(i  :  1-4;  4:  14,  16).  Indeed  its  whole  tone  is  apos- 
tolic, for  none  outside  of  the  apostolate  could  have 
used  the  authoritative  language  that  is  contained  in 
this  Epistle.  Bleek  affirms  that  "  the  Epistle  does 
not  in  the  remotest  degree  give  the  impression  of 
being  the  work  of  one  falsely  endeavoring  to  make 
believe  that  he  was  an  eye-witness." 

The  manifestly  close  relation  existing  between 
this  Epistle  and  the  Gospel  according  to  John  makes 
them  inseparable.  We  may  then  claim  that  all  that 
has  already  been  advanced  in  regard  to  the  canon- 
ical authority  of  the  latter  goes  to  support  the 
former.  The  two  books  stand  or  fall  together. 
Combining  all  this  evidence  as  it  comes  to  us  from 
all  quarters  of  the  early  Church,  as  well  as  from 
the  book  itself,  we  may  feel  that  its  canonical  au- 
thority is  absolutely  established. 


288"  THE  CAinuLic  Eri^JL-Jiii. 

II.   The  Authorship  of  this  Epistle. 

The  name  of  the  author  does  not  appear  in  any 
part  of  the  Epistle,  but  in  the  Church  there  has 
never  been  any  question  but  that  it  was  written  by 
the  Apostle  John.  The  use  of  this  Epistle  by  Poly- 
carp  and  Papias,  who  were  disciples  of  John,  as  well 
as  by  Irenaeus,  who  was  a  disciple  of  Polycarp,  has 
already  been  noted.  These  names  inseparably  con- 
nect this  Epistle  with  John.  Nor  do  we  find  any- 
thing of  moment  that  is  against  this  verdict  until 
we  reach  the  days  of  modern  destructive  criticism. 
Bleek  writes  :  ''From  the  first,  whenever  we  find  this 
Epistle  used  and  expressly  cited,  we  find  also  the 
belief  that  it  claimed  to  be,  and  really  was,  a  work 
of  St.  John  the  Evangelist ;  and  we  may  conclude 
that  this  was  the  universal  belief  Seeing  that  the 
writer  never  names  himself,  we  cannot  explain  this 
unanimity  and  universality  save  on  the  ground  that 
it  was  true,  and  that  it  originated  with  the  very  first 
readers  who  received  the  epistle  from  the  writer,  and 
who  must  have  known  him,  and  not  from  the  mere 
conjecture  or  invention  of  later  readers.  A  com- 
parison of  this  epistle  with  St.  John's  Gospel  can 
leave  no  doubt  on  the  mind  that  both  are  by  the 
same  writer  ;  the  similarity  between  them  is  so  strik- 
ing and  so  thorough,  in  character,  in  thought  and 
language,  in  distinctive  representations  and  turns  of 
expression,  as  to  be  utterly  incomprehensible  save 
on  the  supposition  of  identity  of  authorship."  ^^  Dr. 
Warfield  sums  up  the  argument  for  identity  of  au- 
thorship as  follows :  "  (a.)  The  language  and  the 
style  of  the  two  are  the  same  ;  (b.)  the  circle  of 
«i  Pleek's  Introd.  to  the  N,  T.,  Vol  II,  p.  i86, 


FIRST  JOHN.  289 

theological  ideas  is  the  same  ;  (c.)  the  personality- 
lying  back  of  the  writing  is  the  same  in  both  books  ; 
(d.)  there  are  numerous  passages  which  are  truly 
parallels  between  the  two  writings,  the  phenomena 
of  which  lead  to  the  belief  of  identity  of  author- 
ship." 

And  furthermore,  it  may  be  noted,  that  the  sub- 
stance of  this  Epistle  is  in  absolute  keeping  with  the 
character  of  John,  as  we  are  acquainted  with  it  from 
other  sources.  No  one  outside  of  the  inner  circle  of 
the  disciples  of  Christ  could  have  written  this  mar- 
velous Epistle  ;  and  of  the  disciples,  not  one  of  them 
but  John,  the  beloved  disciple,  could  have  framed 
these  sentences.  There  can  be  no  reasonable  doubt 
but  that  the  man  who  wrote  the  Fourth  Gospel,  also 
wrote  this  Epistle,  and  wrote  it  at  the  same  time  he 
wrote  his  Gospel. 

///.    To    Whom    Written. 

This  question  necessarily  involves  that  of  its 
relation  to  the  Fourth  Gospel.  If  we  can  ascertain 
the  destination  of  that  Gospel,  we  have  the  answer 
to  this  question,  for  the  two  books  were  manifestly- 
composed  at  the  same  time.  But  while  there  are 
most  unmistakable  points  of  resemblance  between 
these  two  books,  there  are  also  differences  occasioned 
by  the  purposes  in  view  in  their  respective  writings. 
"There  are  characteristic  differences  to  be  noted 
between  the  Gospel  and  Epistle.  Perhaps  it  may 
even  be  said  that  the  predominant  burden  of  the 
two  is  slightly  different ;  that  of  the  Gospel  being 
'Jesus  is  the  Christ,'  that  of  the  Epistle,  'Christ 
is  Jesus ; '  the  one  as  a  historis^n  taking  up  the  man 
19 


290  THE   CATHOLIC  EPISTLES. 

Jesus  and  proving  His  divine  glory  by  His  life  and 
words  ;  the  other  as  a  practical  application  to  the 
needs  of  the  time,  showing  that  the  divine  Saviour 
really  became  flesh.  The  Gospel  is  written  from  the 
point  of  view  of  the  historian  ;  the  Epistle  from  that 
of  the  preacher  against  Jiig^ejtro^^  The 

Epistle  is  written  in  the  words  of  the  Gospel  — 
the  Lord's  teaching  has  become  the  teaching  of 
the  beloved  disciple  ;  but  the  Lord's  words  have  be- 
come in  the  transfer  aphoristic,  sharply  defined,  and 
adapted  to  present  needs.  In  the  Gospel,  John 
lives  in  the  past ;  in  the  Epistle,  he  brings  the  past 
to  bear  on  the  present  and  lives  in  the  present. 
The  differences  thus  amount  only  to  the  natural 
differences  between  the  historian  and  the  preacher : 
the  recorder  of  facts  of  teaching  and  the  applier  of 
the  teaching  to  present  needs."  ^^ 

The  resemblances  also  are  striking  and  numerous, 
so  much  so  that  they  necessitate  a  close  relation  in 
time  and  purpose.  The  Gospel  must  have  been  writ- 
ten first,  for  it  forms  the  background  for  the  Epistle. 
The  first  four  verses  of  the  Epistle  presuppose  the 
recording  of  the  facts  there  referred  to.  But  where  is 
that  record  to  be  found,  if  not  in  the  Fourth  Gospel } 
I  14;  2  :I2-I4  point  definitely  to  just  such  a  record 
as  we  have  in  the  Gospel.  Indeed,  as  has  been  well 
said,  "  These  passages,  taken  in  connection  with  the 
unepistolary  character  of  the  letter  —  which  can  only 
be  explained  by  the  supposition  that  it  was  written 
and  sent  under  such  circumstances  as  would  render 
the  naming  of  the  author  on  the  one  hand  unneces- 
sary, and  personal  salutations  to  individuals  on  the 

3'Warfield's  Lectures  to  his  students, 


FIRS 7'  JOHN.  291 

other  hand  impossible  < — seem  to  raise  a  valid  pre- 
sumption that  the  letter  was  a  companion  document 
to  the  Gospel,  sent  with  it  to  apply,  more  practically 
than  was  possible  in  its  own  pages,  the  truths  there 
brought  out,  to  the  lives  of  its  readers." 

From  this  it  is  manifest  that  this  Epistle  was  writ- 
ten for  the  benefit  of  the  same  persons  as  the  Gospel, 
that  the  Apostle  had  them  in  mind  as  he  wrote. 
The  Fourth  Gospel  was  written  for  Qiristiaji§_jn 
S'eneral,  although  the  needs  of  the  Christians  in  and 
around  Asia  Minor  were  kept  especially  in  mind  by 
the  author. 

IV.   The  Occasion  a7td  Object  of  the  Epistle. 

If  what  has  been  advanced  as  to  the  relation  of 
this  Epistle  to  the  Fourth  Gospel  is  correct,  its  occa- 
sion is  to  be  found  in  the  desire  of  the  author 
to  apply  the  history  he  gives  in  his  Gospel  to  those 
for  whom  it  was  written.  There  can  be  no  question- 
ing of  the  polemical  import  of  this  Epistle,  although 
that  was  not  the  only,  nor  even  the  main,  purpose  of 
the  writer.  The  occasion  of  this  Epistle,  then,  is  to 
be  found  in  the  desire  of  the  Apostle  to  personally 
apply  the  facts  of  that  Gospel  history. 
*^  Ih'e  Apostle  plainly  tells  us  the  purpose  he  had  in 
writing.  "  These  things  write  we  unto  you,  that 
your  joy  may  be  full,"  and  ''  these  things  have  I  writ- 
ten unto  you  that  believe  on  the  name  of  the  Son  of 
God  ;  that  ye  may  know  that  ye  have  eternal  life, 
and  that  ye  may  believe  on  the  name  of  the  Son  of 
God."  Alongside  of  these  words,  we  may  place  the 
expressed  purpose  in  the  composition  of  the  Gospel 


292  THE   CATHOLIC  EPISTLES. 

by  the  same  writer.  **  These  things  are  written,  that 
ye  might  believe  that  Jesus  is  the  Christ,  the  Son  of 
God  ;  and  that  believing  ye  might  have  life  through 
his  name"  (20  :  21).  Surely  these  words  indissolubly 
bind  the  two  together. 

During  the  lull  that  followed  the  Neronian  perse- 
cutions there  had  been  a  great  development  of  her- 
etical ideas  among  the  churches  of  Asia  Minor. 
Gnostic  and  Ebionitic  heresies  had  become  very 
prevalent,  in  which  the  true  humanity,  as  well  as  the 
true  divinity,  of  Jesus  had  been  denied.  Cerinthus, 
with  whom  tradition  brings  John  in  contact,  was  the 
most  prominent  leader  among  the  heretics.  The  ob- 
ject of  the  Epistle,  consequently,  **was  practical,  to 
warn  against  and  stop  the  progress  of  heresy  ;  to 
bring  the  facts  of  the  Gospel  against  it.  It  is  in  this 
spirit  he  meets  the  false  tendencies  rife  about  him  : 
with  the  desire  to  save  souls  rather  than  to  intellect- 
ually confute  error.  And  therefore,  he  meets  error 
by  assertions  pointing  back  to  the  facts  of  the  Gos- 
pel rather  than  by  argument." 

The  primary  object  of  the  Epistle  was  the  edifica- 
tion of  believers,  confirming  them  in  their  faith  in 
Christ  as  the  Son  of  God,  the  propitiation  for  the 
sins  of  the  world.  The  polemical  element  has  been 
noted.  Of  this  Dr.  Gloag  writes  :  "  But  the  polem- 
ical element  forms  only  a  small  portion  of  this  EjDistle. 
John  did  not  write  merely  to  confute  gainsayers  or 
to  attack  the  heresies  which  were  then  prevalent. 
He  aimed  at  practical  godliness.  He  wished  to  es- 
tablish believers  in  the  truth  and  in  the  practice  of 
the  truth.  All  his  exhortations  are  with  a  view  to 
this.     He  has  an  intense  hatred  of  sin  and  an  intense 


FIRST  JOHN.  293 

love  of  holiness.  What  he  has  chiefly  in  view  is  the 
promotion  of  fellowship  with  the  Father  and  the  Son, 
and,  by  means  of  this,  fellowship  among  believers. 
He  especially  exhorts  believers  to  entire  severance 
from  the  world.  The  world  is  the  kingdom  of  Satan  ; 
it  is  the  enemy  of  God ;  it  lieth  in  wickedness. 
Herein  consists  the  great  contrast  between  the  king- 
dom of  light  and  the  kingdom  of  darkness.  All  that 
is  in  the  world, —  its  lusts,  its  allurements,  its  re- 
wards,— are  not  of  the  Father.  And  certainly,  at  the 
period  when  John  wrote  his  Epistle,  the  world  was 
in  a  state  of  extreme  degradation,  and  no  warnings 
against  it  could  be  sufficiently  emphatic,  and  no  de- 
nunciations of  it  sufficiently  strong."  ^^ 

F.  Outline  of  the  Epistle. 

This  is  quite  difficult  to  give,  and  many  different 
outlines  have  been  suggested  by  different  writers. 

I.  Introduction,      i  :  1-4. 

1.  Purpose  of  the  Gospel,     i  :  1-3. 

2.  Purpose  of  this  Epistle,     i  :  4. 

II.  Main  body  of  the  Epistle,  in  which  is  made 
the  practical  application  of  the  Gospel  to  its  read- 
ers.    1:5-5:  12. 

1.  Statement  of  the  sinful  condition  of  man. 

I  :5-io. 

2.  The  provided  remedy  in  Christ.     2  :  i-ii. 

3.  Effects  of  union  with  Christ.     2  :  12-17. 

4.  The  divine  power  of  Christ.     2  :  18-29. 

5.  The  love  of  God  for  us.     3:1,2. 

6.  Our  relation  to  that  love.     3  :  3-7. 

7.  Statement  of  false  ideas  as  to  sin  and  right- 

eousness.    3  : 8-12. 
2'Gloag's  Introd.  to  Johannine  Writings,  p.  229. 


294  THE   CATHOLIC  EPISTLES. 

8.  Exhortations  to  brotherly  love.  3  :  13-5  :4. 
(^.)  This  a  fruit  and  proof  of  love.  3  :  13-24. 
(^.)  Test   of  true  and  false   teachers,  and   a  ■ 

warning.     4 :  1-6. 
(^.)  Argument  for  brotherly  love  founded  on 
^  God's  love  for  His  children.     4  :  7-5  :  4. 

III.  Conclusion.      5  :  13-21. 

1.  Fuller  statement  of  the  object  of  the  letter. 

5:13-17- 

2.  Solemn  and  positive  affirmations.     5  '-  18-20. 

3.  Final    exhortation    against    idolatry.     5:21. 

VI.  Date  and  Place  of  Composition. 

This  book  must  have  been  written  in  a  time  of 
external  peace,  and  long  after  any  special  opposition 
from  without.  It  was  also  written  to  advanced 
Christians,  that  is,  to  those  who  had  long  been 
Christians.  Nor  was  it  written  until  the  heresies 
that  Paul  had  dealt  with  had  assumed  more  devel- 
oped forms,  while  the  controversies  of  Paul's  day  in 
regard  to  the  doctrine  of  justification  by  faith  had 
died  out.  These  facts  necessitate  as  late  a  date  as 
possible,  but  one  before  the  outburst  of  persecu- 
tion under  Domitian.  It  must  have  been  written 
before  94  A.  D.,  and  doubtless  we  are  not  far  out 
of  the  way  in  dating  it  about  90  A.  p. 

As  to  the  place  of  composition,  it  may  be  said, 
that  we  have  no  absolute  data,  but  nothing  is  in 
conflict  with  the  idea  of  its  having  been  composed 
at  Ephesus,  where,  as  we  have  already  seen,  John 
unquestionably  resided  for  many  years,  exercising 
a  pastoral  watch  care  over  the  churches  of.  that  re- 
gion, many  of  which  had  been  organized  by  the 
Apostle  Paul. 

*9.     The  witnesses  to  these  truths,     .^  :  5-1  a 


FIRST  JOHN.  295 

VII.  Peculiarities  of  the  Epistle. 

There  is  in  this  Epistle  the  usual  simplicity  of  the 
Apostle's  style,  and  comparatively  few  words  are 
used  in  it.  **  The  language  is  Greek,  but  the  form  of 
expression  is  Hebrew.  There  is  a  picturesqueness 
of  style,  a  Hebrew  rhythm,  like  that  of  the  Old  Testa- 
ment prophets,  which  shows  that  the  writer,  although 
writing  in  comparatively  pure  Greek,  was  a  Hebrew 
poet  and  a  profound  student  of  the  Old  Testament. 
But,  along  with  this  simplicity  of  language,  there  is 
a  profundity  of  thought.  Few  of  the  writings  of  the 
New  Testament  require  more  patient  study  to  dis- 
cover the  full  import  of  the  thoughts  which  the 
words  convey,  or  to  fathom  the  doctrines  which 
are  there  asserted  in  apparently  simple  aphoristic 
terms."  ^* 

The  key-word  of  the  Epistle  is  Love.  But  while 
the  undercurrent  of  the  Epistle  is  directed  by  love, 
this  feature  does  not  prevent  the  Apostle  from  using 
the  sternest  language  in  his  denunciations  of  all  that 
is  not  in  keeping  with  love.  While  John  is  here  the 
stern  preacher  of  righteousness,  he  is  also  the  tender 
and  loving  disciple,  who  hopes  by  his  words  to  win 
the  followers  of  Christ,  whom  he  addresses,  to  the 
full  acceptance  of  His  divinity.  Well  may  the  Chris- 
tian dwell  in  thought  on  the  utterances  of  the  Apos- 
tle in  this  inimitable  Epistle,  until,  by  closer  union 
with  the  Saviour  it  reveals,  he  imbibes  more  and 
more  of  the  love  so  prominent  in  it.  What  a  thrill 
of  rapture  passes  through  us  as  we  read  the  ecstatic 
burst  of  3  :  I,  2  !  Who  is  there  that  can  saturate  his 
mind  with  the  words  of  the  third  and  fourth  chap- 
2*Gloag's  Johannine  Writings,  p.  232. 


296  THE   CATHOLIC  EPISTLES. 

ters,  without  growing  more  and  more  into  the  like- 
ness of  the  Saviour  whose  love  they  depict  ?  Who 
is  there,  who,  realizing  the  sinful  tendencies  of  his 
nature,  is  not  emboldened  to  turn  away  from  his  sin 
to  God,  when  he  has  the  assurance  that  we  have  an 
Advocate  with  the  Father,  even  Christ  Jesus  the 
righteous  ?  What  consolation  to  know  that  the 
vilest  sinner  may  be  cleansed  in  the  blood  of  Jesus 
Christ,  God's  own  Son  ?  Applying  the  facts  of  the 
Gospel  history  as  contained  in  the  Fourth  Gospel  to 
our  hearts  and  lives,  will  they  not  lead  us  to  '*  walk 
even  as  he  walked  "  ? 

V  AND  VI.   THE   SECOND   AND   THIRD   EPISTLES 
OF  JOHN. 

These  two  Epistles  are  so  closely  associated  to- 
gether that  it  seems  best  and  most  convenient  to 
treat  them  together. 

/.   Canonicity. 

On  account  of  the  character  and  brevity  of  these 
Epistles,  it  would  be  unreasonable  to  expect  many 
quotations  from  them  in  the  early  Christian  litera- 
ture. The  first  distinct  reference  to  them  is  found  in 
the  Muratori  Canon  (170),  where  mention  is  made  of 
"two  Epistles  bearing  the  name  of  John."  In  speak- 
ing of  the  Gospel  according  to  John,  the  writer  of 
this  Muratori  Canon  seems  to  associate  with  it  the 
First  Epistle.  The  theory  has  already  been  ad- 
vanced that  the  First  Epistle  was  a  companion  piece 
to  the  Fourth  Gospel,^^  having  been  issued  with  it 
as  a  practical  application  of  the  facts  written  in  that 
Gospel  to  those  to  whom  it  was  addressed.  Does  not 
25  See  on  First  John, 


SECOND   AND    THIRD   JOHN.  297 

the  Muratori  Canon  support  this  idea  by  the  way 
in  which  it  appears  to  link  them  together  ?  For  this 
reason,  it  is  held,  that  the  two  Epistles  mentioned 
together  must  be  the  Second  and  Third  Epistles  as 
we  have  them.  Irenaeus  (i/S)  and  Clement  of  Alex- 
andria (195)  explicitly  quote  the  Second  Epistle 
by  name,  but  Origen  (230)  is  the  first  person  in 
whose  extant  writings  the  Third  Epistle  is  quoted 
by  name.  We  know  that  Clement  of  Alexandria 
wrote  a  commentary  on  all  the  Catholic  Epistles, 
and  consequently  he  must  have  included  this  one. 
The  second  century  Versions  —  the  Old  Latin,  the 
Egyptian  and  the  Syriac  (in  the  original  form  that 
is  earlier  than  the  Peshito)  —  include  this  Epistle. 
Eusebius,  it  is  true,  classes  these  Epistles  among  the 
disputed  books,  but  it  is  evident  that  he  unhesita- 
tingly accepts  them  himself  as  being  of  Apostolic 
origin  and  authority.  **  The  whole  fourth  century 
Church  accepts  them,  as  is  witnessed  to  by  the  vari- 
ous lists  of  that  century  and  its  great  writers  as  well 
as  all  fourth  century  MSS.,  and  Versions." 

Turning  to  the  Epistles  themselves,  we  find  that 
the  internal  evidence  is  not  without  weight  on  this 
matter.  No  conceivable  object  can  be  suggested  for 
their  forgery,  for  they  contain  nothing  distinctive 
in  doctrine  or  otherwise.  Bleek  writes  :  **  Both  Epis- 
tles present  such  an  affinity  with  First  John  in  ideas, 
exposition,  and  language,  both  generally  and  in  par- 
ticulars, as  to  lead  us  to  attribute  them  to  the  same 
writer  ;  for  this  affinity  cannot  be  explained  as  an 
imitation.  The  little  that  is  peculiar  to  these  Epis- 
tles as  distinct  from  the  First  Epistle  and  the  Gospel, 
is  not  of  a  character  to  warrant  the  supposition  that 


298  THE   CATHOLIC  EPISTLES. 

they  have  come  from  a  different  hand,  and  Is  far  out- 
weighed by  the  points  of  resemblance."  Of  the 
Second  Epistle  no  less  than  seven  or  eight  of  its 
thirteen  verses  are  to  be  found  in  the  First  Epistle. 
And  in  regard  to  the  Third,  it  can  be  said  that  the 
writer  not  only  describes  himself  in  the  same  way  as 
in  the  Second,  and  writes  generally  in  the  same 
language  and  style,  but  also  that  the  same  phrases 
appear  in  both  Epistles. 

The  fact  of  the  matter  is  that  these  two  Epistles 
must  stand  or  fall  together.  Against  them  no  cogent 
arguments  can  be  advanced.  The  most  that  can  be 
said  is  that  the  references  to  them  do  not  appear  un- 
til late  ;  but  this  is  easily  accounted  for  on  the  basis 
of  their  brevity  and  character,  as  well  as  by  the  fact 
that  there  were  individual  doubts  in  the  Church  as 
to  their  authorship.  In  the  third  century  the  Church 
in  all  quarters,  with  the  possible  exception  of  the 
Syrian  Church,  and  that  only  after  a  critical  revision 
of  their  Canon,  accepted  these  Epistles  as  of  apostolic 
origin  and  authority.  Only  absolute  proof  to  the 
contrary,  which  is  certainly  lacking,  can  avail  to  set 
aside  this  well-nigh  universal  acceptance  of  these 
Epistles. 

//.   The  Authorship  of  these  Epistles, 

In  neither  of  these  Epistles  does  the  author  name 
himself  He  simply  calls  himself  ''the  elder."  But 
all  antiquity  affirms  that  they  were  written  by  a  man 
named  John.  The  Muratori  Canon  ascribes  them  to 
the  Apostle  of  that  name  ;  and  so  also  do  Irenaeus 
and  Clement  of  Alexandria.  Origen  is  the  first  who 
mentions   doubt  as  to  their  authorship.      Eusebius 


SECOND  AND    THIRD  JOHN.  299 

affirms  the  existence  of  a  ''  presbyter  John,"  a  con- 
temporary of  the  Apostle  John,  basing  this  idea  on 
an  inference  he  draws  from  some  words  of  Papias. 
But  scholars  are  by  no  means  agreed  that  Eusebius' 
inference  is  correct.  And  the  existence  of  this  pres- 
byter John,  as  a  person  distinct  from  the  Apostle 
John,  is  very  doubtful.  No  reference  is  made  to  such 
a  person  before  the  time  of  Eusebius,  unless  his  in- 
terpretation of  the  words  of  Papias  is  correct. 

On  the  other  hand,  the  words  already  quoted 
from  Bleek  show  that  there  is  a  very  close  relation 
between  these  letters  and  the  First  Epistle,  which 
all  acknowledge  was  written  by  John,  the  author  of 
the  Fourth  Gospel.  First  John  is  anonymous  like 
these  Epistles.  And  the  whole  tone  of  these  is  as 
Johannean  as  the  First  Epistle.  It  is  to  be  noted 
that  the  author  in  both  of  these  Epistles  calls  him- 
self "  the  elder,"  and  by  that  title  he  may  mean  "the 
aged,"  referring  to  the  fact  that  the  writer  belonged 
to  the  last  generation,  and  not  to  the  fact  that  he 
claimed  to  be  par  excellence  **  the  elder."  It  is  evi- 
dent, then,  that  the  internal  evidence,  as  well  as 
the  external  testimony,  wherever  we  have  any  such 
testimony,  is  strongly  in  favor  of  the  Johannean  au- 
thorship of  these  two  Epistles. 

///.    To    Whojn  Addressed. 

The  Second  Epistle  is  addressed  "  unto  the  elect 
lady  and  her  children."  There  have  been  two  general 
explanations  of  this  address.  Some  have  understood 
the  term  "elect  lady"  as  meaning  either  a  particular 
church,  or  else  the  Church  universal.  If  the  lat- 
ter idea  is  correct,  then,  this  is  truly  a  catholic  Epis- 


300  THE    CATHOLIC  EPISTLES. 

tie.  On  the  other  hand,  there  are  a  great  many 
scholars  who  think  that  the  words  of  the  address  are 
to  be  taken  literally,  and  that  the  letter  is  conse- 
quently addressed  to  a  certain  Christian  lady  and 
her  children.  Against  the  former  idea,  it  may  be 
urged  that  it  introduces  a  metaphorical  usage  into 
a  plain  prose  letter.  In  addition  to  this,  it  may  be 
affirmed  that  it  is  impossible  to  find  warrant  for  the 
use  of  the  word  ''kuria"  (translated  *Mady")  as 
meaning  "  church."  Very  probably  the  word  "  kuria" 
should  be  understood  as  a  proper  name.  In  that 
case  the  letter  is  addressed  "  unto  the  elect  Kyria." 
This  is  in  harmony  with  the  character  and  contents 
of  the  Epistle  itself. 

Of  this  matron  Kyria,  we  know  nothing  except 
what  may  be  gathered  from  the  letter  itself.  She 
was  a  Christian,  and  probably  did  not  reside  very  far 
from  Ephesus,  She  had  a  family  of  grown  children, 
some  of  whom,  at  least,  were  Christians.  Her  exem- 
plary character  had  endeared  her  to  the  Apostle.  It 
is  evident  that  John  was  contemplating  a  visit  to  her 
home,  when  he  would  speak  more  at  length  to  her  on 
the  matters  referred  to  in  this  Epistle. 

The  Third  Epistle  is  addressed  to  "  the  well  be- 
loved Gaius."  We  find  three  men  of  this  name  men- 
tioned in  the  New  Testament,  namely,  a  Macedonian 
(Acts  19 :  29),  a  Corinthian  (i  Cor.  i  :  14  ;  Rom.  16  : 
23),  and  another  who  lived  in  Derbe  (Acts  20:4). 
We  have  no  means  of  ascertaining  whether  the  one 
addressed  in  this  Epistle  is  one  of  these  three  or  not. 
All  that  can  be  said  is  that  this  Gaius  was  a  person 
who,  because  of  his  genuine  Christian  character,  re- 
ceived the  highest  commendation  from  the  Apostle. 


SECOND  AND    THIRD   JOHN  301 

Two  other  men  are  also  named  in  the  Epistle,  Deme- 
trius and  Diotrephes.  Of  these  two  men,  we  gather 
from  the  Epistle  that  Demetrius  was  a  true  and  ear- 
nest Christian  ;  while  Diotrephes,  who  seems  to  have 
been  an  officer  in  their  church,  was  a  bold,  unscru- 
pulous, and  ambitious  man,  whose  conduct  brings 
upon  him  the  severe  censure  of  the  Apostle.  It  is 
probable  that  the  persons  who  bore  the  First  Epistle 
to  the  church,  of  which  they  were  all  members,  had 
been  rejected  by  Diotrephes.  He  may  have  been  a 
prominent  representative  of  the  heresy  that  John 
condemns  in  his  First  Epistle.  In  that  case  it  was 
natural  for  him  to  reject  the  Epistle  sent  by  the 
Apostle,  as  well  as  the  messengers  who  carried  it. 

IV.   The  Occasion  and  Objects  of  the  Epistles. 

The  Second  Epistle  was  occasioned  by  the  infor- 
mation received  in  regard  to  some  of  the  children  of 
Kyria.  "John  has  learned  that  amid  the  declensions 
of  Christian  life  and  the  frequent  fallings  away  from 
the  truth  which  had  occurred  since  the  rise  of  Gnostic 
teaching  in  Asia,  some  of  the  children  of  this  be- 
loved matron  are  involved  and  likely  to  be  led  away 
into  destruction."  This  is  the  occasion  of  the  Epistle. 
[And  its  object  wasJo3arnKyria  and  her  family  of 
the  daliger  to  which  they  were  exposed,  as  well  as 
to  entreat  them  to  be  steadfast  and  watchful.]  It  at  the 
same  time  enjoins  them  to  have  nothing  to  do  with 
the  disseminators  of  heresy,  not  even  to  receive  them 
into  their  home,  or  to  bid  them  '*  Godspeed." 

The  Third  Epistle  was  brought  out  by  the  fact 
that  Diotrephes  had  been  using  his  authority  in  the 
cliurch  to  resist  the  truth  and  protect  heresy.     Gaius, 


302  THE  CATHOLIC  EPISTLES, 

on  the  other  hand,  had  received  John's  messengers, 
whom  Diotrephes  had  rejected,  and  had  kindly 
treated  them.  The  Apostle,  therefore,  writes  to 
commend  Gaius  for  the  stand  he  had  taken  in  this 
matter,  and  to  approve  him  and  his  work  and 
strengthen  him  in  his  position.  The  Apostle  at 
the  same  time  commends  Demetrius  and  condemns 
Diotrephes. 

V.  Contents  of  the  Epistles, 

The  following  is  an  outline  of  the  contents  of  the 
Second  Epistle  :  — 

1.  Address  and  Greeting.     1-3. 

2.  Expressions   of  joy  in  regard  to  the  children 
who  were  standing  firm.     4. 

3.  Exhortation  to  love  and  obedience.     5,  6. 

4.  Warning    against    dangerous     anti  -  Christian 
teachers.     7-9. 

5.  Warning  against  extending  hospitality  to  such 
persons.     10,  11. 

6.  Promise  to  visit  them.     12. 

7.  Greetings  from  Kyria's  sister's  children.      13. 
The  following  is  an  outline  of  the  contents  of  the 

Third  Epistle  :  — 

1.  The  Address,     i. 

2.  Personal  good  wishes.     2-4. 

3.  Gaius  commended   for   his  Christian  hospital- 
ity.    5-8. 

4.  Diotrephes  condemned.     9,  10. 

5.  Demetrius  commended.     11,12. 

6.  Will  not  write  any  more  at  present.     13. 

7.  Promise   to   visit    Gaius,   and   closing    saluta- 
tion.    14. 


JUDE,  303 

VI.  Date  and  Place  of  Composition. 

Both  of  these  Epistles  were  unquestionably  writ- 
ten at  KpV|f^sn.q.,  As  there  are  no  time  marks  in  these 
Epistles,  it  is  impossible  to  affirm  just  when  they 
were  written.  It  is,  however,  well-nigh  certain  that 
they  were  composed  after  the  First  Epistle.  We 
cannot  be  far  out  of  the  way  when  we  date  them 
about  91  A.  p. 

VII.   THE   EPISTLE    OF    JUDE. 
/.    Canonicity. 

"  Although  the  Epistle  of  Jude  is  one  of  the  so- 
called  Disputed  Epistles,  and  its  canonicity  was 
questioned  in  the  earliest  ages  of  the  Church,  there 
never  was  any  doubt  of  its  genuineness  among  those 
by  whom  it  was  known.  It  was  too  unimportant  to 
be  a  forgery,  few  portions  of  the  Holy  Scripture 
could,  with  reverence  be  it  spoken,  have  been  more 
easily  spared  ;  and  the  question  was  never  whether 
it  was  the  work  of  an  impostor,  but  whether  its 
author  was  of  sufficient  weight  to  warrant  its  admis- 
sion into  the  Canon." 

But  turning  to  the  external  evidence,  we  find  that 
this  letter  is  remarkably  well  authenticated,  when 
we  consider  its  brevity  and  the  nature  of  its  contents. 
The  allusions  to  it  in  Barnabas  (106),  Polycarp  (116), 
and  Hermas  (140-150)  are  rather  uncertain  ;  but  it  is 
plainly  mentioned  in  the  Muratori  Canon  (170). 
Clement  of  Alexandria  (195)  quotes  it  by  name, 
and  Tertullian  (190),  Origen  (230),  and  Cyprian 
(248)  do  the  same.  Eusebius,  while  classing  it 
among    the    Disputed    Books,  tells    us    that  it  was 


304  THE   CATHOLIC  EPISTLES. 

well  known  by  many,  and  that  it  was  publicly 
used  in  most  of  the  churches.  It  is  in  the  Old 
Latin  Version,  but  not  in  the  Peshito  Syriac,  al- 
though we  know  from  other  sources  that  Ephrem 
Syrus  used  it.  By  the  early  fourth  century  it  was 
almost  universally  recognized. 

In  regard  to  the  internal  evidence  in  this  matter, 
it  must  be  acknowledged  that  it  is  not  so  strong. 
De  Wette  writes :  **  No  important  objection  to  the 
genuineness  of  this  Epistle  can  be  made  good ; 
neither  the  use  of  the  apochryphal  Book  of  Enoch, 
nor  the  resemblance  of  verses  24  and  25  to  Romans 
16:25,  nor  a  style  of  writing  which  betrays  a  cer- 
tain familiarity  with  the  Greek  tongue.  The  Epis- 
tle is  the  less  open  to  suspicion,  as  the  author  does 
not  distinctly  claim  to  be  an  Apostle,  nor  can  a 
pretext  for  forgery  be  discovered." 

The  real  basis  of  attack  upon  this  Epistle  has 
been  the  uncertainty  about  its  authorship,  and  its 
asserted  use  of  the  apochryphal  Book  of  Enoch  and 
the  Assumption  of  Moses,  as  well  as  its  relation  to 
Second  Peter.  There  are,  indeed,  those  who  deny 
that  Jude  quotes  this  Book  of  Enoch,  but  even  grant- 
ing that  he  does,  how  does  that  fact  affect  its  authen- 
ticity }  Paul  undoubtedly  secured  the  names  of  Jan- 
nes  and  Jambres,  the  magicians  who  withstood  Moses, 
from  some  Jewish  tradition.  Why  cannot  Judc  use 
the  curious  legend  about  the  contest  between  Michael 
and  Satan  over  the  body  of  Moses  obtained  from 
some  rabbinical  sources  as  well }  The  Old  Testa- 
ment writers  frequently  used  extra-canonical  sources 
of  information.  Why  cannot  the  New  Testament 
writers  do  the  same  ? 


7UDE.  305 

The  fact  that  this  book  won  its  way  into  the 
Canon  of  the  New  Testament  at  an  early  day  de- 
spite the  attacks  that  had  been  made  upon  it,  is 
greatly  in  its  favor.  The  use  of  it  in  Second  Peter 
cannot  be  denied,  it  being  used  in  that  Epistle  in 
something  like  the  same  way  that  First  Peter  uses 
Ephesians  and  Romans.  We  may  conclude,  then, 
that  the  fact  that  it  has  stood  all  the  attacks  that 
have  been  made  upon  it  in  ancient  and  modern  times, 
affords  presumptive  evidence  in  favor  of  its  canon- 
ical authority. 

//.   The  Author  of  this  Epistle. 

It  claims  to  be  by "  Tuj[eiJthe__servant  of  Jesus 
Christ,  and  brother  of  James."  Now,  although  there 
are  no  less  than  six  Judes  mentioned  in  the  New 
Testament,  of  whom  do  we  here  think  but  of  the 
man  who  was  a  brother  of  the  James,  who  was  so 
prominent  in  the  Jerusalem  church,  the  author  of  the 
Catholic  Epistle  bearing  the  name  of  James.  It  is 
certain  that  the  author  of  this  Epistle  was  not  an 
Apostle,  although  the  phrase  *'  servant  of  Jesus 
Christ  "does  not  forbid  that,  for  the  author  seems 
expressly  to  exclude  himself  from  the  number  of  the 
Apostles,  when  he  says,  **  Remember  the  words  which 
were  spoken  before  of  the  apostles  of  our  Lord  Jesus 
Christ."  Among  the  Apostles  there  was  a  Jude  or 
Judas  (not  Iscariot),  but  he  unquestionably  was  the 
son  and  not  the  brother  of  one  James.  We  cannot 
but  adopt  the  plainest  interpretation  of  the  writer's 
description  of  himself,  and  conclude  with  many  lead- 
ing authorities,  that  this  Jude  was  none  other  than 
the  brother  of  that  James  who  was  so  prominent  in 

30 


30G  THE  CATHOLIC  EPISTLES. 

the  Church  that  the  mere  mention  of  his  name  was 
sufficient.  He  was  Jude  the  brother  of  the  James 
who  was  the  brother  of  our  Lord. 

Of  this  Jude  we  know  nothing  directly.  Like 
James,  he  did  not  believe  in  our  Lord  until  after  His 
resurrection.  The  traditions  concerning  him  are 
conflicting-  and  uncertain.  Western  tradition  affirms 
that  he  labored  among  the  Persians.  Syrian  tradi- 
tion says  that  he  went  to  Assyria  and  died  a  martyr 
in  Phoenicia.  It  is  evident  that  he  was  content  to 
do  the  work  of  his  Saviour-brother  in  an  unostenta- 
tious way,  and  he  probably  sealed  his  faith  by  a 
martyr's  death. 

///.   To   Whom  Addressed. 

It  is  addressed  to  '*  them  that  are  sanctified  by 
God  the  Father,  and  preserved  in  Jesus  Christ,  and 
called."  These  words  prove  it  to  be  truly  a  Catho- 
lic Epistle.  It  is  addressed  to  Christians  ggner^j, 
although  a  clo¥e"'^xammati6'rr*or  the  contents  will 
show  that  the  author  had  in  mind  especially  those 
who  were  acquainted  with  Jewish  history.  It  is  prob- 
able that  Jude  had  in  mind  particularly  the  Jewish 
Christians  of  Palestine.  ''Although  the  Epistle  is  in 
form  catholic,  addressed  to  the  Christian  Church  in 
general  without  any  restriction  as  to  locality,  yet 
from  the  nature  of  its  contents  it  is  evident  that  it 
must  have  been  directed  to  Christians  belonging  to 
some  particular  church,  or  residing  in  some  particular 
district.  "^^ 

^^Gloag's  Catholic  Epistles,  p.  364. 


7UDE,  307 

IV.   The  Occasion  a^td  Object  of  the  Epistle. 

The  occasion  of  the  writing  of  this  Epistle  was 
the  growth  of  heretical  opinions  and  the  spread  of 
immoral  conduct,  together  with  the  desire  of  the 
writer  to  do  something  to  check  the  progress  of  that 
which  was  threatening  the  purity  of  the  Church. 
The  design  is  clearly  stated  by  the  author.  "  Be- 
loved, when  I  gave  all  diligence  to  write  unto  you  of 
the  common  salvation,  it  was  needful  for  me  to  write 
unto  you,  and  exhort  you  that  ye  should  earnestly 
contend  for  the  faith  which  was  once  delivered  unto 
the  saints.  For  there  are  certain  men  crept  in  una- 
wares, who  were  before  of  old  ordained  to  this  con- 
demnation, ungodly  men,  turning  the  grace  of  our 
God  into  lasciviousness,  and  denying  the  only  Lord 
God,  and  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ"  (3,  4).  From  these 
words  it  is  apparent  that  Jude's  design  was  not  only 
to  instruct  and  confirm,  but  also  to  urge  them  to 
stand  up  for  their  historic  faith  against  all  who  tried 
to  corrupt  it. 

The  description  of  these  ungodly  persons  is 
painted  in  the  darkest  colors.  Although  professing 
to  be  Christians,  they  were  excessively  immoral. 
They  were  in  the  Church  it  is  true,  but  they  had 
"crept  in  unawares."  And  as  they  denied  Christ  it 
is  manifest  that  they  were  heretics,  but  worse  still, 
and  as  a  result  of  their  heresies,  they  were  utterly 
and  grossly  immoral.  Theoretically  they  were  he- 
retical ;  practically  they  were  guilty  of  the  most  un- 
blushing immorality.  Their  false  doctrines  and  loose 
conduct  went  hand  in  hand.  It  was  for  this  reason 
that  Jude  wrote  to  confirm  and  strengthen  and   in- 


308  THE  CATHOLIC  EPISTLES. 

struct  the  faithful,  as  well  as  to  denounce  these  un- 
godly persons. 

"  The  main  body  of  the  Epistle  is  well  character- 
ized by  Alford  as  an  impassioned  invective,  in  the 
impetuous  whirlwind  of  which  the  writer  is  hurried 
along,  collecting  example  after  example  of  Divine 
vengeance  on  the  ungodly ;  heaping  epithet  upon 
epithet,  and  piling  image  upon  image,  and  as  it  were 
laboring  for  words  and  images  strong  enough  to  de- 
pict the  polluted  character  of  the  licentious  apostates 
against  whom  he  is  warning  the  Church  ;  returning 
again  and  again  to  the  subject,  as  though  all  lan- 
guage was  insufficient  to  give  an  adequate  idea  of 
their  profligacy,  and  to  express  his  burning  hatred 
of  their  perversion  of  the  doctrines  of  the  Gospel." 

V.   The  Contents  of  the  Epistle. 

1.  Salutation,     i,  2. 

2.  Reason  for  writing.     3,  4. 

3.  Historical  argument,  proving  that  the  ungodly 
will  certainly  be  punished.     5-7. 

4.  Application  of  this  with  the  contrast  of  godly 
conduct.     8-10. 

5.  Denunciation  and  description  of  these  evil- 
workers.     11-13. 

6.  Proof  from  prophetic  utterances  that  the  un- 
godly will  be  punished,  and  the  application  thereof. 
14-19. 

7.  Earnest  exhortation  to  the  faithful  in  regard  to 
themselves  and  their  attitude  toward  the  ungodly. 
20-23. 

8.  Benediction  and  doxology.     24,  25. 


JUDE,  309 

VL  Date  and  Place  of  Composition. 

This- Epistle  must  have  been  written  before  the  dc 
struction  of  Jerusalem.  "  If  that  event  had  occurred, 
we  do  not  see  how  Jude,  as  a  strict  Jewish  Chris- 
tian, could  possibly  have  omitted  that  awful  calamity 
which  made  such  a  powerful  impression  on  all  Jews 
in  his  examples  of  the  destructions  which  befell  the 
ungodly  ;  to  Jude  it  must  have  appeared  the  most 
striking  of  all  the  instances  of  divine  wrath,  and  the 
most  appropriate  for  his  purpose."  The  Epistle 
must  also  have  been  written  before  Second  Peter,  if 
we  are  correct  in  claiming  that  the  latter  is  depend- 
ent on  the  former.  The  Epistle  could  not  have 
been  written  at  an  early  date,  for  sufficient  time 
must  be  allowed  for  the  development  of  heresy  of 
belief  and  error  of  conduct.  Taking  all  these  things 
into  consideration,  it  is  probably  correct  to  date  it 
about  64-^66^.  D. 

As  to  the  place  of  composition,  there  is  not 
much  to  be  said.  It  is  most  probable  that  it  was 
composed  in  Palestine.  It  may  have  been  written  in 
Jerusalem  before  the  commencement  of  the  Jewish 
war  that  ended  in  the  destruction  of  the  city  and 
temple. 

VII.  CoJtclusion. 

It  is  interesting  to  note  the  inseparable  connec- 
tion between  correct  beliefs  and  right  living,  as  set 
forth  in  this  Epistle.  It  is  a  mistaken  idea  that  the 
Church  of  the  early  days  was  perfectly  pure,  for  then 
as  now,  the  greatest  obstacles  to  the  progress  of  the 


310  THE   CATHOLIC  EPISTLES. 

Church  were  within  and  not  without.  And  in  these 
days  there  is  no  little  need  for  just  such  an  appeal  as 
this  is  to  all  Christians  to  protect  historical  Chris- 
tianity against  all  the  attacks  of  her  enemies,  whether 
they  be  in  the  Church  or  out  of  it.  We  have  need 
to  "  earnestly  contend  for  the  faith  which  was  once 
delivered  unto  the  saints." 


CHAPTER  IX. 

The  Revelation. 

The  title  of  this  book  might  better  have  been 
"The  Apocalypjs"  by  an  adoption,  rather  than 
"The  Revelation  "  by  a  translation,  of  the  original 
Greek  title.  The  word  thus  rendered  in  general  sig- 
nifies "  a  disclosure  by  God  of  truths  that  are  them- 
selves secret  and  unknown."  The  reference  of  the 
title  is  to  future  events.  The  word  "Apocalypse" 
designates  a  peculiar  type  of  prophecy,  which  ex- 
presses itself  not  so  much  in  predictive  as  in  symbol- 
ical utterances  by  which  the  course  of  future  events 
was  made  known.  "  Apocalyptic  writings  are  dis- 
tinguished from  those  which  are  simply  prophetical 
by  their  predictions  referring  to  the  last  days,  and 
by  their  preponderant  use  of  symbols  and  visions." 

/.    Canonicity. 

There  are  traces  of  the  use  of  this  book  in  Barna- 
bas (io6),  Ignatius  (115),  the  Teaching  of  the  Twelve 
Apostles  (115),  and  the  Testaments  of  the  Twelve 
Patriarchs  (120).  Papias  (120),  according  to  the  tes- 
timony of  Andreas  and  Arethas,  Bishops  of  Cappa- 
docian  Csesarea  in  the  fifth  and  sixth  centuries, 
definitely  refers  to  this  book,  regarding  it  as  an  in- 
spired writing.  Hermas  (140-150)  has  remarkable 
coincidences  with  it,  and  Justin  Martyr  (145)  men- 
tions it  by  name  as  proceeding   from   the    Apostle 


312  THE  REVELATIOISt. 

John.  Eusebius  refers  to  a  treatise  by  Melito  of 
Sardis  (170)  upon  this  book,  and  also  informs  us  that 
Apollonius  (170)  used  it.  It  is  enumerated  in  the 
Muratori  Canon  (i/o),  and  was  cited  by  Theophilus 
of  Antioch  (170).  There  are  also  some  undeniable 
quotations  from  it  in  the  Epistle  of  the  Churches  of 
Lyons  and  Vienne  (177).  Irenaeus  (175),  Tertullian 
(190),  and  Clement  of  Alexandria  (195)  quote  it  by 
name,  ascribing  it  to  John.  In  the  third  century, 
Hippolytus  (220)  and  Origen  (230)  use  it  as  authori- 
tative Scripture.  The  first  writer  who  directly  assails 
it  is  Dionysius  (250).  "  Nor  did  doubt,  when  it  had 
thus  once  entered  the  Church,  spread  rapidly.  The 
third  century  closes  without  giving  us  the  name  of 
another  doubter,  and  although  Eusebius  himself 
wavers,  and  tells  us  that  opinion  in  his  day  was  much 
divided,  and  soon  afterwards  the  Syrian  Church  re- 
jected jt, —  not  without  affecting  the  judgment  of 
individual  writers  in  Jerusalem,  Asia  Minor,  and 
Constantinople, —  yet  Eusebius  believed  it  to  be  in- 
spired and  canonical,  the  doubts  were  purely  of  an 
internal  kind,  the  Church  at  large  was  never  affected 
by  them,  and  the  storm  even  in  the  East,  was  soon 
weathered."  ^ 

Marcion,  as  might  be  expected  from  his  heretical 
ideas,  rejected  this  book,  together  with  the  other  Jo- 
hannean  writings.  The  Alogi  also,  on  account  of  doc- 
trinal considerations,  refused  to  recognize  it  as  a  part 
of  Scripture.  It  was  likewise  omitted  from  the  Peshito 
Syriac  Version.  The  difficulties  connected  with  the 
interpretation  of  the  book  unquestionably  had  no 
little  to  do  with  the  doubts  that  arose  in  the  minds 
of  individuals  in  regard  to  its  canonical  authority. 
*  Warfield  in  the  Schaff-Herzog  Encyclopaedia, 


THE  REVELATION,  313 

But  most  of  all  that  was  urged  against  it  were  the 
apparent  divergences  between  it  and  the  other  writ- 
ings of  John  in  doctrinal  conception,  spirit,  style, 
and  language.  In  Reformation  times  it  was  rejected 
by  Luther,  Erasmus,  and  Zwingle.  And  also  in  the 
present  century,  many  have  raised  objections  to  it 
on  one  account  and  another. 

It  is  to  be  noted,  however,  that  the  objections  that 
have  been  urged  against  it  have  all  been  founded  on 
internal  considerations,  and  not  on  any  lack  of  exter- 
nal testimony  to  its  early  use  and  recognition.  The 
early  acceptance  of  the  book  unqualifiedly  attests 
its  recognized  canonical  authority.  And  it  was  not 
until  the  third  century  that  the  slightest  doubt  arose 
in  regard  to  it,  and  even  then  these  doubts  were  con- 
fined within  very  narrow  limits. 

The  internal  evidence  supports  this  external  testi- 
mony. In  four  places  the  author  calls  himself  John 
(i  :  I,  4,  9  ;  23  :  8).  He  claims  to  have  been  an  eye- 
witness of  the  Saviour's  earthly  career,  and  he  also 
uses  the  language  of  apostolic  authority.  It  is  evi- 
dent, then,  from  the  book  itself  that  its  author 
was  aprominent  and  important  personage,  one  who 
sustained  a  close  and  authoritative  relation  to  the 
churches  of  Western  Asia  Minor.  *'  He  is  acquainted 
with  their  history,  their  necessities,  their  spiritual 
condition,  their  trials." 

//.    TJie  AutJiorship  of  the  Book, 

This  is  so  closely  related  to  the  subject  of  its 
canonicity  that  the  treatment  of  these  two  subjects 
is  well-nigh  inseparable.  The  opinion  of  the  early 
Church  was  positively  in  support  of  the  Johannean 
(Apostle)  authorship  of  the   book.     It  has  already 


314  THE  REVELATION, 

been  noted  that  it  claims  to  be  byaj^ohn.  Justin 
Martyr  directly  affifins  that  this  John  was  the  Apos- 
tle John.  In  regard  to  this  man's  testimony,  Weiss 
writes:  "Justin's  direct  statement  that  it  was  writ- 
ten by  John,  one  of  the  Apostles  of  Christ,  is  the 
more  significant  since  his  home  was  in  Palestine,  and 
he  had  learned  in  his  wanderings  to  know  the  Alex- 
andrian and  Roman  Churches  as  also  that  of  Asia 
Minor  in  which  the  book  had  its  origin,  equally  well, 
and  therefore  represented  the  tradition  of  the  whole 
Church  of  the  second  century."^ 

To  whom  would  we  most  naturally  ascribe  the 
book  but  to  the  Apostle  John, —  that  John  whose 
pre-eminence  was  so  great  as  to  make  him  the  one  of 
whom  people  would  instantly  think  on  the  mere 
mention  of  the  name  John  ?  But  it  is  objected  that 
this  idea  is  negatived  by  the  dissimilarities  between 
it  and  the  other  Johannean  writings, —  dissimilarities 
in  doctrine,  spirit,  style,  and  language.  In  answer  to 
this  objection,  Gloag  writes:  "Although  we  admit 
these  dissimilarities  and  differences,  yet  we  do  not 
think  that  they  are  of  so  strong  or  decided  a  charac- 
ter as  to  necessitate  us  affirming  a  diversity  of  au- 
thorship. The  difference  in  doctrine  is  slight,  and  is 
fairly  accounted  for  by  the  apocalyptic  nature  of  the 
Revelation.  The  difference  in  spirit  is  more  mani- 
fest, but  is  also  accounted  for  by  considering  the 
subject-matter  of  the  writings.  The  differences  in 
language  and  style  are  still  greater,  but  are  lessened 
by  considering  the  different  circumstances  under 
which  these  works  were  written,  and  the  necessary 
influence  of  his  Old  Testament  models  on  the  author 
of  the  Apocalypse,  and  are  to  a  considerable  extent 
^Weiss' Introd.,  Vol.  II,  p.  51,      ....*.-'-'---•-       •' 


THE  REVELATION.  315 

counter-balanced  by  undoubted  and  peculiar  similari- 
ties." ^  Some  have  thought  to  preserve  the  identity 
of  authorship  of  these  books  by  claiming  that  the 
Apocalypse  was  written  before  the  destruction  of 
the  Temple,  and  therefore  about  thirty  years  before 
the  time  of  the  composition  of  the  Fourth  Gospel. 
By  thus  separating  them  in  time,  they  hope  to  ac- 
count in  a  satisfactory  way  for  their  diversities. 
And  indeed  if  there  were  not  other  and  stronger 
reasons  for  dating  this  later  than  the  Fourth  Gospel, 
there  would  be  no  little  reason  in  this  line  for  the 
early  date  assigned. 

Others  again  ascribe  the  book  to  the  Presbyter 
John  mentioned  by  Papias,  holding  that  he  was  a 
different  person  from  John  the  Apostle.  But  there 
are  good  reasons  for  doubting  whether  Papias  did 
really  mention  two  different  men  of  the  name  John. 
Prof.  Charteris  writes  :  **  Apart  from  questions  of 
canonicity  there  is  as  great  division  of  opinion  as  to 
authorship.  The  scraps  of  Papias  have  been  as  fruit- 
ful of  works  upon  the  two  Johns  as  in  works  upon 
the  original  of  Matthew'6  Gospel,  or  upon  the  'order' 
of  Mark.  Dionysius,  though  in  a  very  diffident  man- 
ner, took  refuge  in  the  supposition  that  Presbyter 
John  was  the  author.  But  against  this  Irenaeus  is 
decided.  Moreover,  if  Irenaeus  and  Arethas  be 
right,  Papias,  as  a  'hearer  of  John,'  is  an  ultimate 
authority,  and  Papias'  testimony  seems  to  be  dis- 
tinct ;  so  that  the  authorship  by  the  son  of  Zebedee 
is  established."*  Irenaeus,  who  frequently  cites  this 
book,  ascribing  it  to  the  Apostle  John,  was  the  disci- 
ple of  Polycarp,  who  in  his  turn  was  the  pupil  of  the 

3  Gloag's  Johannine  Writings,  p.  311 
*  Charteris'  Canonicity,  p  .  358. 


316  THE  REVELATION. 

Apostle.  It  is  impossible  to  deny  the  force  and 
clearness  of  Irenaeus*  testimony  in  this  matter,  and 
it  ought  to  decide  the  whole  question. 

By  a  very  few  writers  the  book  has  been  ascribed 
to  Cerinthus,  the  great  heretical  opponent  of  John. 
This  Cerinthus  was  the  exponent  of  a  view  of  the 
millennium  that  was  utterly  sensuous  in  its  concep- 
tion. The  reference  of  this  book  (chapter  20)  to  the 
millennium  was  made  the  basis  of  this  idea.  But  this 
theory  met  with  but  little  acceptance,  and  it  cannot 
be  entertained  for  a  moment  in  the  face  of  the  claims 
of  the  book  itself  as  to  its  authorship,  as  well  as  of 
the  direct  testimony  of  the  early  Church  to  its  Jo- 
hannean  authorship. 

It  is  to  be  noted  that  many  German  writers  of 
this  century,  who  reject  the  Johannean  authorship 
of  the  Fourth  Gospel,  acknowledge  that  in  this  book 
we  have  a  genuine  product  of  the  pen  of  the  Apostle 
John.  If  then  we  are  to  believe  the  testimony  of 
the  early  Church,  we  must  accept  its  verdict  that 
John  the  Apostle  wrote  the  Apocalypse.  Internal 
considerations  alone  have  ever  been  the  cause  of 
wavering  in  this  opinion.  Dr.  Ezra  Abbot  writes 
that  the  author  is  "the  acknowledged  channel  of  the 
most  direct  and  important  communication  that  was 
ever  made  to  the  seven  churches  of  Asia  Minor,  of 
which  John  the  Apostle  was  at  that  time  spiritual 
governor  and  teacher.  The  writer  was  a  fellow- 
servant  of  angels  and  a  brother  of  prophets  —  titles 
which  are  far  more  suitable  to  one  of  the  chief  Apos- 
tles, and  far  more  likely  to  have  been  assigned  to 
him,  than  to  any  other  man  of  less  distinction.  All 
these  marks  are  found  united  together  in  the  Apostle 


THE  REVELATION.  317 

John,  and  in  him  alone  of  all  historical  persons.  We 
must  go  out  of  the  region  of  fact  into  the  region  of 
conjecture  to  find  such  another  person.  A  candid 
reader  of  the  Revelation,  if  previously  acquainted 
with  St.  John's  other  writings  and  life,  must  inevi- 
tably conclude  that  the  writer  intended  to  be  identi- 
fied with  St.  John." " 

Summing  up  the  evidence,"  we  must  conclude  that 
John  the  Apostle  was  the  only  possible  author  of  this 
book,  and  consequently  it  is  of  apostolic  origin  and 
canonical  authority.'^ 

///.    To   Whom  Addressed, 

This  is  very  clear  from  i:ii,  where  we  read, 
"What  thou  seest,  write  in  a  book,  and  send  it  unto 
the  seven  churrhag  which  are  in  Asia  ;  unto  Ephesus, 
and  unto  Smyrna,  and  unto  Pergamos,  and  unto 
Thyatira,  and  unto  Sardis,  and  unto  Philadelphia, 
and  unto  Laodicea."  These  cities  were  all  situated 
in  what  was  known  as  Proconsular  Asia.  It  is  prob- 
able that  these  Seven  Churches  were  selected  as 
representatives,  for  we  know  of  the  existence  of 
churches  at  Colossae,  Hierapolis,  Miletus,  and  Troas, 
and  there  were  probably  many   others  in   the  same 

^  Smith's  Dictionary  of  the  Bible. 

*  The  following  early  writers  declare  it  to  be  by  John  the  Apostle; 
namely,  Justin  Martyr,  the  author  of  the  Muratori  Canon,  Melito  of 
Sardis,  Theophilus  of  Antioch,  Irenseus,  Tertullian,  Clement  of  Alex- 
andria, Origen,  Hippolytus,  Victorinus,  Methodius,  Ephrem  Syrus, 
Epiphanius,  Basil,  Hilary,  Athanasius,  Gregory  of  Nyssa,  Didymus, 
Ambrose,  Augustine,  and  Jerome. 

'  The  most  elaborate  defense  of  the  Johannean  authorship  of  this 
book  is  to  be  found  in  Dr.  Lee's  Introd,  to  his  Commentary  on  the 
Revelation  in  the  Bible  Commentary.  See  also  Dr.  Warfield's  Article 
on  the  Unity  of  the  Book  in  the  Presbyterian  Review  of  April,  1S84. 


318  THE  RE  VELA  TION. 

general  locality.  The  number  seven  recurs  repeat- 
edly in  this  book,  and  this  number  of  churches  may 
have  been  selected  to  preserve  the  symmetry  of  the 
whole. 

Of  these  Churches,  the  first  named  is  Ephesus, 
which  was  the  capital  of  Proconsular  Asia.  This 
was  a  magnificent  city,  famed  for  the  grandeur  of  its 
buildings,  and  also  because  it  contained  one  of  the 
seven  wonders  of  the  world,  the  temple  of  Diana. 
To-day  it  is  "a  miserable  village  called  Ayasalook." 
Smyrna  remains  to  this  day  an  important  and  flour- 
ishing city.  Pergamos,  now  known  as  Bergamah, 
and  a  city  of  some  size,  was  in  John's  day  a  place  of 
renown  on  account  of  its  school  and  extensive  library, 
as  well  as  its  magnificent  temple  dedicated  to  yEscu- 
lapius.  Thyatira  still  continues  to  exist  with  a  con- 
siderable population  under  the  name  of  Akhissar. 
Sardis,  once  famed  as  the  proud  city  that  was  the 
royal  residence  of  Croesus,  has  nothing  left  of  its 
former  grandeur,  and  is  a  little  village  known  as 
Sart.  Philadelphia  also  remains  to  this  day,  having 
lost  its  former  name,  and  is  now  called  Allasher. 
Laodicea,  the  last  named,  was  destroyed  by  an  earth- 
quake in  Nero's  day,  and  arose  afterwards  with  new 
and  greater  splendor  from  its  ruins,  but  only  to  sink 
again  into  utter  ruin.  To-day  nothing  remains  of 
it  to  mark  its  former  site  but  dreary  desolation  and 
destruction. 

"  From  the  Epistles  addressed  to  these  Seven 
Churches  we  learn  something  of  their  condition 
when  the  Apocalypse  was  written.  There  is  a  sym- 
metry in  these  Epistles  ;  the  Churches  are  first 
blamed  for  what  evil  is  in  them,  then  commended 
for  their  good  points,  and  a  promise  is  given  to  those 


THE  REVELATION.  319 

who  continue  faithful.  There  is  a  considerable  dif- 
ference among  them  :  the  Churches  of  Smyrna  and 
Philadelphia  are  entirely  commended  —  no  faults  are 
attributed  to  them  ;  whereas  the  Church  of  Laodicea 
is  wholly  blamed  —  no  words  of  praise  are  bestowed 
upon  it.  The  other  four  Churches  of  Ephesus,  Sar- 
dis,  Pergamum,  and  Thyatira,  are  partly  commended 
and  partly  blamed.  These  Churches  had  evidently 
existed  for  some  time  ;  they  had  gone  through  a 
stage  of  experience.  Several  of  them  had  degener- 
ated ;  they  had  left  their  first  love  and  their  early 
zeal  had  cooled.  The  Churches  were  persecuted  ; 
some  of  them  were  tried  and  had  tribulation  ;  and  in 
the  Church  of  Pergamum,  where  Satan's  seat  is,  in 
allusion  perhaps  to  the  worship  of  ^sculapius, 
whose  emblem  was  the  serpent,  mention  is  made  of 
Antipas,  who  had  suffered  martyrdom  (Rev.  2:13). 
Heresies  had  arisen  in  these  Churches  ;  certain  forms 
of  Gnosticism  had  made  their  appearance.  In  most 
of  the  Epistles,  reference  is  made  to  internal  corrup- 
tions ;  in  the  Epistles  to  Ephesus  and  Pergamum, 
special  mention  is  made  of  the  Nicolaitanes  ;  in  the 
Epistle  to  Pergamum,  of  those  who  held  the  doctrine 
of  Balaam  ;  and  in  the  Epistle  to  Thyatira,  of  the 
woman  Jezebel,  who  called  herself  a  prophetess  and 
who  seduced  the  servants  of  Christ."^ 

IV.   The  Occasion  and  Object  of  the  Book. 

The  occasion  of  this  book  was  the  explicit  direc- 
tion^^f  tlie  risen  Lord  to  John  to  write  it.  The 
condition  of  these  Churches  demanded  a  direct 
communication,  and  there  was  need  for  unveiling  the 
future  for  the   instruction   of  the   Church   at   large. 

8  Gloag's  Johannine  Writings,  p.  315. 


320  THE  revelation; 

The  book  is  described  and  its  purpose  unfolded  in  its 
opening  words:  "The  Revelation  of  Jesus  Christ, 
which  God  gave  unto  him  to  show  unto  his  servants 
the  things  which  must  shortly  come  to  pass."  From 
these  words,  it  is  evident  that  the  direct  messages  to 
the  Churches  named  were  of  minor  importance,  and 
that  the  main  purpose  was  to  make  known  the  final 
victory  of  the  Church.  This  ultimate  triumph  of  the 
kingdom  of  Christ  over  His  enemies  is  the  prominent 
feature  of  the  book.  "  The  great  moral  design  is  to 
comfort  and  support  Christians  under  the  trials  and 
persecutions  to  which  they  were  exposed,  by  assur- 
ing them  that  these  trials  were  of  short  duration, 
and  that  their  enemies  would  at  length  be  conquered 
and  destroyed." 

F.    The  Contents  of  the  Book, 

Of  all  the  outlines  of  the   contents   of  the  book 
that  have  been  suggested  by  different  writers,  that 
of  Professor  Warfield  is  the  best. 
Prologue.     I  :  i-8. 
I.'  The  Seven  Churches,     i  :  9-3  :  22. 
2.  The  Seven  Seals.    4  : 1-8  :  i. 
3.1  The  Seven  Trumpets.     8  :  2-1 1 :  19. 
4.1  The  Seven  Mystic  Figures.     12  :  1-14  :  20. 
5.1  The  Seven  Vials.     15:1-16:21. 
j  6.|Th6  Sevenfold  Judgment.     17  :  1-19  :  10. 
I  7.  [The  Sevenfold  Triumph.     19  :  11-22:5. 
Epilogue.     22:6-21. 
**  The  sevenfold  subdivision  of  each  section  is  easy 
to  trace  in  all  cases  except  in  4,  6,  and  7,  where  it  is 
more  difficult  to  find  and  is  more  doubtful."' 

'  WarfieWs  Article  in  the  Schaff-Herzog  Encyclopaedia, 


THE  REVELATION'.  321 

VI.    The  Date  and  Place  of  Composition, 

There  are  in  general  but  two  opinions  on  the 
question  of  the  date  of  this  book.  By  some  it  is  as- 
signed to  a  date  before  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem 
in  the  reign  of  Galba  or  Vespasian  ;  by  others  it  is 
dated  about  96  A.  D.,  in  the  reign  of  Domitian.  The 
majority  of  critics  to-day  assign  it  to  the  former 
date,  and  hold  that  it  was  composed  just  after  the 
death  of  Nero  in  6'^  A.  D.  By  these  critics  it  is  held 
that  the  internal  evidence  of  the  book  is  that  it  was 
composed  before  the  destruction  of  the  Temple  at 
Jerusalem  (11:1,2,8;  20  :  9).  Then  again  it  is  con- 
tended that  there  is  a  designation  of  the  time  of  its 
composition  in  the  account  of  the  seven  heads  of  the 
beast,  which  are  held  to  represent  seven  Roman  em- 
perors. **  The  seven  heads  are  seven  mountains,  on 
which  the  woman  sitteth.  And  there  are  seven 
kings  :  five  are  fallen,  and  one  is,  and  the  other  is  not 
yet  come  ;  and  when  he  cometh,  he  must  continue  a 
short  space.  And  the  beast  that  was,  and  is  not, 
even  he  is  the  eighth,  and  is  one  of  the  seven"  (17  : 
9-1 1).  The  five  that  are  fallen  are  said  to  be  Augus- 
tus, Tiberius,  Caligula,  Claudius,  and  Nero.  The 
one  in  power  was  Galba;  "and  the  seventh,  who  is 
yet  to  come,  is  Otho,  his  successor,  as  Galba's  reign 
was  expected  to  be  of  short  duration  on  account  of 
his  extreme  age."  It  was  generally  supposed  that 
Nero  was  not  actually  dead,  but  that  he  was  in 
hiding  somewhere  in  the  East,  and  would  sometime 
reappear  and  regain  his  throne.  This  coincides  with 
the  description  of  the  eighth  king,  "  the  beast  who 
was  and  is  not,  and  is  of  the  seven."  According  to 
21 


322  THE  REVELATION. 

this  theory  this  book  was  written  during  the  reign 
of  the  sixth  emperor,  that  is,  Galba.  But  it  is  a 
mere  assumption  that  this  interpretation  of  this  pas- 
sage is  the  correct  one.  It  certainly  presumes  that 
John  coincided  with  the  belief  that  Nero  was  not 
really  dead  and  would  appear  again.  But  this  belief 
was  a  mere  legend,  that  has  no  actual  historical  war- 
rant. The  term  *' kings  "may  not  refer  to  persons 
but  to  kingdoms,  as  it  does  in  the  book  of  Daniel 
(Dan.  7  :  17,  23),  a  book  that  undoubtedly  had  its  in- 
fluence on  John. 

Reference  has  already  been  made  to  the  fact  that 
some  writers  have  selected  this  early  date  in  order 
to  give  sufficient  time  between  its  composition  and 
that  of  the  Fourth  Gospel  for  the  author  to  change 
his  style  of  writing.  It  is  claimed  that  John  wrote 
this  book  before  he  had  acquired  a  very  correct 
knowledge  of  the  Greek  language,  and  that  his  resi- 
dence had  been  in  Palestine  and  not  among  a 
Greek-speaking  people.  In  the  Apocalypse,  which 
is  intensely  Hebraistic,  the  writer  seems  to  violate 
some  plain  rules  of  Greek  construction  ;  while  the 
Fourth  Gospel  is  written  in  the  purest,  most  simple 
and  accurate  Greek.  Consequently,  it  has  been  held, 
that  the  Apocalypse  marks  the  close  of  the  activity 
among  his  own  people  ;  while  the  Fourth  Gospel 
was  written  after  many  years'  residence  among  the 
Greek-speaking  people  of  Asia  Minor.  But  this 
theory  is  without  any  historical  support,  and  is  only 
devised  to  account  for  the  acknowledged  differences 
that  exist  between  these  two  books.  But  these  lin- 
guistic differences  can  be  accounted  for  on  other 
grounds,  such  as  the  different  features  of  the  two 


THE  REVELATION.  323 

books,  as  well  as  the  different  states  of  the  mind  of 
the  author  at  the  time  of  their  composition.  If  for 
other  reasons  we  must  assign  the  date  of  the  book 
to  the  reign  of  Domitian,  instead  of  that  of  Galba, 
this  argument  for  the  early  date  of  the  book  falls  to 
the  ground. 

But  there  is  an  absolute  lack  of  historical  con- 
firmation for  this  early  date.  Irenaeus  affirms  that 
the  visions  recorded  in  the  book  were  seen  at  the 
end  of  the  reign  of  Domitian.  Now  the  well-known 
relation  of  Irenaeus  to  John  through  Polycarp,  his 
own  teacher  and  John's  pupil,  makes  this  testimony 
strong  enough  to  settle  the  whole  matter  in  favor  of 
this  late  date.  The  writer  was  in  exile  on  ''  Patmos 
for  thr  w(>rd  '^f  God,  Rnd  for  th<"  test^'"^^"y  nf  J^-<^iig 
Christ."  Eusebius,  Victorinus,  and  Jerome  plainly 
affirm  that  it  was  Domitian  who  banished  John  to  the 
Isle  of  Patmos,  and  that  the  Apostle  returned  from 
thence  to  Ephesus  on  the  death  of  this  tyrant.  And 
not  one  of  the  early  writers  connects  Nero  with  John's 
exile.  It  is  confirmatory  of  the  idea  that  Domitian 
was  the  emperor  who  did  this,  to  know  that  it  was 
his  custom  to  banish  people  for  various  offenses 
against  his  will. 

In  regard  to  the  internal  evidence  on  this  subject, 
it  may  be  noted  that  the  references  to  the  Churches 
addressed  presuppose  conditions  in  them  incompat- 
ible with  an  early  date.  Ephesus  had  backslidden, 
having  left  her  first  love  ;  Sardis  had  a  profession  of 
life,  but  was  to  all  practical  purposes  dead ;  and 
Laodicea  was  in  a  lukewarm  condition.  Then  the 
heresies  mentioned  had  not  attained  to  such  develop- 
ment in  early  days  as  is  evident  from  what  is  said  of 


324  THE  revelation; 

them  in  this  book.  The  externally  prosperous  con- 
dition of  Laodicea  is  commented  on,  but  in  62  A.  D., 
it  was  completely  destroyed  by  an  earthquake,  and 
it  was  not  until  many  years  later  that  it  attained  to 
the  condition  described  in  Rev.  3  :  17.  The  persecu- 
tions to  which  the  Christians  addressed  were  exposed, 
harmonize  more  with  the  wide-spread  and  systematic 
onslaughts  on  the  Church  by  Domitian,  than  the 
persecutions  inflicted  here  and  there,  especially  at 
Rome,  by  Nero.  Furthermore  it  is  manifest  that 
the  author  had  an  intimate  acquaintance  with  these 
Asia  Minor  Churches.  Now  it  is  absolutely  certain 
that  John  did  not  come  to  Ephesus  during  the  life- 
time of  Paul.  Indeed  the  late  date  alone  will  satis- 
factorily account  for  the  evidence  furnished  by  the 
book  that  the  author  had  for  a  long  time  been  ac- 
quainted with  the  condition  and  needs  of  these  Seven 
Churches. 

I  am  therefore  led  to  believe  that  the  internal 
evidence  supports  the  external  testimony  that  [this 
book  was  written  at  the  close  of  the  reign  of  Domi- 
tian, that  is,  about  96  A.  D.  The  visions  were  re- 
vealed to  the  Aposfle  on  the  Isle  of  Patmos,  and  it 
is  most  probable  that  they  were  immediately  com- 
mitted to  writing  by  John  before  he  returned  to 
Ephesus,  and  while  he  was  still  on  the  Isle  of  Patmos. 

VIL    The  Interpretation  of  this  Book. 

There  is  no  book  of  the  New  Testament  that  has 
given  commentators  greater  trouble,  or  upon  whose 
interpretation  there  is  greater  diversity  of  opinion, 
than  this  one.  There  are  in  general  four  different 
systems  of  interpretation  :  (i.)  The  JlistQrical  theory, 


THE  REVELATION.  325 

which  holds  thatth£_bookJs  a  j)ro^ 
of  tTie"~ChrIsFian  Church  from  its  beginning  to  its 
final  con'summatiorr"^'*T275'  The  Praeterlst  theory, 
which  maintains  that  the  predictive  utterances  of 
the  book  have  already  been  fulfilled  ;  that  its  princi- 
pal  reference  is  to  the^bjumph__of  the  ChristiaiLxelig- 
ion  over  Judaism  "a  rfd  Paganism...  (3.)  The  Futurist 
theory,  which  holds  that  with  the  exception  oi  the 
first  three  chapters,  the  book  refers  in  the  main  to 
events  which  are  as  yet  future.  (4.)  The  Spiritual 
theory,  according  to  which  **the  Apocalypse  is  not  a 
professed  detailed  history  of  the  future,  but  only  a 
conspectus  of  the  great  epochs  and  of  the  governing 
principles  in  the'3evelopment  of  the  kingdom  of  God^ 
in  its  relation  to  the  kingdoms  of  this  world." 

VIIL    The  Peculiarities  of  the  Book, 

The  symbolism  of  the  book  is  its  most  prominent 
and  striking  peculiarity.  The  number  four  occurs 
frequently,  as,  for  example,  there  are  four  living 
creatures  before  the  throne  ;  four  angels  at  the  four 
corners  of  the  earth,  holding  the  four  winds  ;  four 
angels  sent  forth  to  vex  the  world  ;  a  voice  from 
the  four  corners  of  the  altar ;  the  nations  in  the  four 
corners  of  the  earth.  But  the  number  seven  is  even 
more  prominent ;  there  being  seven  Churches,  seven 
candlesticks,  seven  stars,  seven  seals,  seven  trumpets, 
seven  vials,  seven  thunders,  seven  spirits,  the  Lamb 
with  seven  horns  and  seven  eyes,  the  seven-headed 
beast,  seven  mountains,  and  seven  kings. 

This  book  is  the  only  prophetical  book  in  the 
New  Testament.  And  in  its  general  features  it 
bears  much  the  same   relation    to  the  New   Testa- 


326  THE  REVELATION. 

ment  that  Daniel  does  to  the  Old  Testament.  It 
partakes  of  some  of  the  characteristics  of  Daniel 
and  Ezekiel.  It  was  written  after  the  models  thus 
furnished  it  in  the  Old  Testament.  Its  tone  is 
thoroughly    Hebraistic. 

The  following  words  of  Dr.  Gloag  may  well  con- 
clude our  studies  on  this  book.  He  writes  :  "An  au- 
thor who  writes  a  history  employs  a  different  style 
in  writing  a  poem  or  a  philosophical  dissertation. 
The  Apocalypse  is  a  prophecy,  the  prevision  of  the 
future  ;  the  Gospel  is  a  history,  the  recollection  of 
the  past.  The  Apocalypse  is,  as  regards  its  form,  a 
series  of  visions  communicated  to  the  Apostle.  The 
Gospel  is  chiefly  a  record  of  the  discourses  of  the 
Lord  with  His  familiar  disciples.  In  the  one  the  im- 
agination is  elevated  ;  in  the  other  the  memory  is 
exercised.  The  spirit  in  which  these  works  were 
written  is  very  different.  In  writing  the  Apocalypse, 
the  author  was  in  a  state  of  ecstasy ;  he  was,  like 
Paul,  caught  up  to  the  third  heavens  ;  a  prophetic 
fire  burned  within  him  ;  visions  and  revelations  from 
God  were  imparted  to  him  ;  his  enthusiasm  was 
kindled.  In  writing  the  Gospel  and  the  Epistle,  on 
the  other  hand,  the  author  was  calm  and  collected  ; 
the  inspiration  imparted  to  him,  although  of  a  most 
elevating  nature,  was  not  ecstatic  ;  he  wrote  in  full 
self-consciousness.  As  Guericke  well  expresses  it, 
the  Gospel  of  John  was  conceived  and  written  in  the 
understanding  ;  the  Apocalypse,  on  the  other  hand, 
in  the  spirit."" 

1^  Gloag's  Johannine  Writings,  p.  304. 


INDEX  OF  AUTHORS  AND  SUBJECTS. 


Abbot,  Ezra,  15,  48,  55,  58,  316. 

Acts,  the,  canonicity,  74 ;   authorship,  76  ;    sources,  80  ;  occasion  and 

object,  82  ;  contents,  85  ;  date  and  place  of  composition,  86. 
Alexander,  Lord  Bishop  of  Derry,  106. 
Alexander  the  coppersmith,  228. 
Alford,  Dean,  143,  152,  189,  233,  237,  308. 

Alogi,  the,  reject  Fourth  Gospel,  56  ;  reject  the  Revelation,  312. 
Andrews,  Samuel  J.,  20,  252,  255. 
Apollos,  at  Corinth,  128  ;  at  Ephesus,  178. 
Aquila     and  Priscilla,  125-128. 
Archippus,  resident  minister  at  Colossas,  160 ;  his  parents,  169. 

Babylon,  First  Peter  written  there,  33,  274. 

Barnabas,  cousin  to  Mark,  30 ;  separates  from  Paul,  32  ;  not  author  of 

Epistle  to  the  Hebrews,  233. 
Baur,  61,  168. 
Beet,  Prof.  J.  A.,  152. 
Berea,  loi. 

Bleek,  F.,  57,  61,  77,  108,  146,  250,  287,  288,  297. 
Brethren  of  our  Lord,  252-258. 
Burrhus,  86,  194,  197. 

Canon,  not  fixed  by  ecclesiastical  authority,  2  ;  meaning  of,  2. 

Catholic  Epistles,  name  and  number,  247,  248. 

Cenchrea,  134. 

Cerinthus,  the  heretic,  66,  316. 

Charteris,  Prof.  A.  H.,  75,  315. 

Clement  of  Alexandria,  65,  234,  236,  278. 

Colossians,  the  Epistle  to,  canonicity,  157  ;  the  Colossian  church,  158; 
occasion  and  object,  161  ;  outline,  163  ;  date  and  place  of  compo- 
sition, 164  ;  peculiarities,  167  ;  compared  with  Ephesians,  185. 

Conybeare  and  Howson's  St.  Paul,  143,  161,  166,  180,  199,  200,  202, 
227. 

Cook,  Canon,  271, 

[327  J 


328  INDEX  OF  AUTHORS  AND  SUBJECTS. 

Corinth,  the  city  of,  125  ;  Christianity  planted  there,  126 ;  Paul's  sup- 
posed second  visit  there,  142  ;  composition  of  church  there,  127  ; 
factious  elements  in  church,  137. 

Corinthians,  the  First  Epistle  to,  canonicity,  124;  the  Corinthian 
church,  125;  occasion  and  object,  128;  outline,  130;  date  and 
place  of  composition,  131  ;  concluding  remarks,  132 ;  Second 
Epistle  to,  canonicity,  133  ;  to  whom  written,  134 ;  occasion  and 
object,  135  ;  outline,  139 ;  date  and  place  of  composition,  141  ; 
number  of  Paul's  visits  to  Corinth,  142  ;  the  lost  Epistle,  144. 

Crete,  the  island  of,  218. 

Davidson,  Dr.  Samuel,  24,  38,  $2,  76,  174,  235,  276. 

Delitzsch,  Franz,  237. 

Demetrius,  301. 

DeWette,  145,  152,  168, '186,  208,  287,  304. 

Diotrephes,  301. 

Dods,  Prof.  Marcus,  7,  80,  132. 

Ellicott,  Bishop,  143,  158,  162,  176,  208. 

Epaphras,  founded  churches  at  Colossse,  Laodicea,  and  Hierapolis,  160 ; 
visits  Paul  for  consultation,  161. 

Epaphroditus,  messenger  to  Paul  from  the  PhiUppians,  192,  193. 

Ephesians,  the  Epistle  to,  canonicity,  175  ;  the  Ephesian  church,  177  ; 
destination  of  the  Epistle,  181  ;  occasion  and  object,  182  ;  con- 
tents, 183  ;  date  and  place  of  composition,  184  ;  peculiarities,  184; 
compared  with  Colossians,  185. 

Ephesus,  the  city  of,  Paul's  first  visit,  178;  Apollos  there,  178;  it 
religious  life,  180. 

Eusebius,  66,  230,  248. 

Farrar,  Canon,  54,  88,  94,  145,  261. 

Gains,  of  Corinth,  entertains  Paul,  154  ;  Third  John  written  to,  299. 

Galatia,  situation,  114;  Paul's  sickness  there,  1 16. 

Galatians,  the  Epistle  to,  canonicity,  113;  the  Galatian  church,  114; 
occasion  and  object,  117  ;  outline,  118  ;  date  and  place  of  compo- 
sition, 120 ;  peculiarities,  123. 

Gardner,  Frederic,  240. 

GifEord,  Dr.  E.  H.,  145,  147,  155. 

Gloag,  Paton  J.,  Pauline  Epistles,  95,  99,  103,  113,  115,  129,  134, 
J38,  152,  158,  176,  185,  188,  198,  220,229,240;  Catholic  Epis- 


INDEX  OF  AUTHORS  AND  SUBJECTS.  329 

ties,  249,  258,  260,  270,  285,  306 ;  Johannine  Writings,  58,  60,  67, 
73,  292,  295,  314,  319,  326. 

Godet,  Prof.,  45,  58,  60,  185. 

Gospels,  meaning  and  use  of  term,  4 ;  number  and  order,  4  ;  Tatian's 
Harmony,  5  ;  Irenseus'  argument  as  to  their  number,  5  ;  witness  of 
Muratori  Canon,  6  ;  characteristics,  6  ;  Synoptic  Gospels,  meaning, 
7  ;  for  whom  written,  7  ;  their  origin,  8 ;  Synoptic  problem,  8 ; 
Norton  on  their  agreements  and  differences,  9 ;  various  theories  as 
to  origin,  10;  original  Aramaic  written  Gospel,  12;  Westcott  on 
need  for  committing  Gospel  history  to  writing,  13  ;  oral  preaching 
the  real  basis  of  the  Gospels,  14 ;  Mark,  the  briefest  form  of  that 
preaching,  14. 

Gregory,  Prof.,  49,  50. 

Guericke,  326. 

Gwynn,  Dean,  188,  190. 

Hackett,  Prof.  H.  B.,  168. 

Harris,  Prof.  J.  Rendel,  205. 

Hebrews,  Epistle  to,  canonicity,  230  ;  authorship,  233  ;  to  whom  writ- 
ten, 241  ;  occasion  and  object,  241  ;  outline,  242 ;  date  and  place 
of  composition,  244  ;  peculiarities,  245. 

Hobart,  W.  K.,  44. 

Howson,  Dean,  114,  117,  263. 

Huther,  J.  E.,  200,  219. 

Irenjeus,  original  language  of  Matthew,  20  ;  number  of  Gospels,  5  ; 
date  of  Matthew,  26 ;  concerning  Mark,  36. 

James,  Epistle  of,  canonicity,  249 ;  author,  252 ;  to  whom  addressed, 
258 ;  occasion  and  object,  259 ;  contents,  261  ;  date  and  place  of 
composition,  262  ;  peculiarities,  263. 

Jerome,  original  language  of  Matthew,  20,  21. 

John,  the  Apostle,  author  of  Fourth  Gospel,  58 ;  history,  61  ;  residence 
at  Ephesus,  63  ;  personal  characteristics,  64 ;  author  of  First  John, 
288  ;  author  of  Second  and  Third  John,  298  ;  author  of  the  Reve- 
lation, 313  ;  banished  to  Patmos  by  Domitian,  323. 

John,  First  Epistle  of,  canonicity,  286  ;  author,  288 ;  to  whom  written, 
289 ;  companion  piece  to  the  Fourth  Gospel,  290  ;  occasion  and 
object,  291  ;  outline,  293  ;  date  and  place  of  composition,  294  ; 
peculiarities,  295  ;  Second  and  Third  Epistle  of,  canonicity,  296  ; 
author,  298  ;  to  whom  written,  299 ;  occasion  and  objects,  301 ; 
contents,  302  ;  date  and  place  of  composition,  303. 


330  INDEX  OF  AUTHORS  AND  SUBJECTS. 

J6hn,  the  Gospel  according  to,  caiionicity,  55  ;  authorship,  58 ;  for 
whom  written,  65  ;  occasion  and  design,  65  ;  sources  of,  67  ;  con- 
tents, 68  ;  date  and  place  of  composition,  69  ;  peculiarities,  70. 

John  the  Presbyter,  same  as  John  the  Apostle,  299,  315. 

Journal  of  the  Exegetical  Society,  117,  121. 

Jowett,  Prof,,  121,  151. 

Jude,  the  brother  of  our  Lord,  305  ;  Epistle  of,  canonicity,  303  ;  author, 
305  ;  to  whom  addressed,  306  ;  occasion  and  object,  307  ;  contents, 
308  ;  date  and  place  of  composition,  309. 

Kay,  Dr.  William,  238. 

Kyria,  Second  Epistle  of  John  addressed  to,  299. 

Lange,  J.  P.  E.,  41. 

Lightfoot,  Bishop,  58,  63,  115,  121,  159,  170,  193. 

Lost  Epistle  of  Paul,  144. 

Lucke,  287. 

Luke,  the  Evangelist,  author  of  Third  Gospel,  43  ;  a  Gentile  and  a 
physician,  44  ;  joined  Paul  at  Troas,  45,  78  ;  not  an  eye-witness  of 
Gospel  history,  46  ;  literary  style,  46  ;  a  careful  historian,  47  ; 
relation  to  Paul,  51  ;  author  of  Acts,  76  ;  faithful  to  the  end,  224. 

Luke,  the  Gospel  according  to,  canonicity,  42  ;  Marcion's  Gospel  a 
mutilated  Luke,  42  ;  authorship,  43  ;  sources  of,  47  ;  object,  48  ; 
for  whom  written,  49  ;  contents,  50  ;  date  and  place  of  composi- 
tion, 51  ;  relation  to  Paul,  51  ;  peculiarities,  53. 

Lunemann,  Prof.,  240,  241. 

Luther,  Martin,  123,  155,  239,  251. 

"  Man  of  sin,"  108,  112, 

Marcion,  on  Luke,  42. 

Mark,  the  Evangelist,  30 ;  author  of  Second  Gospel,  30 ;  connec- 
tion with  Peter,  30,  36,  38  ;  the  young  man  who  followed  Jesus 
when  arrested,  31  ;  cousin  to  Barnabas,  31  ;  with  Paul  on  first 
missionary  journey,  31  ;  his  defection,  32  ;  restored  to  Paul's  con- 
fidence, 33  ;  associated  with  Peter,  33  ;    traditions  concerning,  34. 

Mark,  the  Gospel  according  to,  canonicity,  28  ;  authorship,  30  ;  pur- 
pose, 34  ;  written  for  the  Roman  type  of  mind,  35  ;  contents,  36  ; 
date  and  place  of  composition,  36  ;  Peter's  Gospel,  36 ;  the  fulfill- 
ment of  Peter's  promise  in  2  Peter  i  :  15,  37  ;  integrity,  39  ;  pecu- 
liarities, 40. 

Marshall,  Prof,  J.  T.,  12. 

Matthew,  the  Apostle,  18-20. 


INDEX  OF  AUTHORS  AND  SUBJECTS,  331 

Matthew,  the  Gospel  according  to,  canonicity,  i6 ;  authorship,  i8 ; 
original  language,  20;  arguments  for  Greek  original,  21  ;  confused 
with  the  apocryphal  "Gospel  according  to  the  Hebrews,"  22 ; 
purpose  of,  23  ;  an  historical  argument,  23  ;  fulfilled  prophecies 
noted,  24  ;  contents,  25  ;  date  and  place  of  composition,  26  ;  pecul- 
iarities, 27  ;  the  kingly  jospel,  28. 

Meyer,  H.  A.  W.,  39,  58,  77,  80,  138,  143,  158,  165,  207. 

Michaelis,  Prof.  J.  D.,  186. 

Moorhead,  Prof.,  245. 

Norton,  Andrews,  10. 
Nicopolis,  in  Epirus,  221. 

Olshausen,  57,  143,  152. 
Onesimus,  170. 

Origen,  original  language  of  Matthew,  20;  destination  of  Luke,  50; 
on  authorship  of  Hebrews,  233. 

Paley,  75,  134,  168,  176. 

Papias,  on  the  "Oracles,"  12  ;  original  language  of  Matthew,  20;  on 
Mark,  29. 

Paul,  the  Apostle,  87  ;  conversion,  88  ;  missionary  journeys,  89,  90 ; 
arrest  in  Jerusalem,  91  ;  imprisoned  at  Csesarea,  91  ;  taken  to 
Rome,  92  ;  released  from  Roman  imprisonment,  199  ;  chronology 
of  Hfe,  93  ;  character,  94  ;  writings,  95  ;  no  real  hostility  to  Peter, 
82 ;  journey  to  Spain,  202  ;  last  days,  201-204. 

Pauline  Epistles,  the  Early  Epistles,  98  ;  the  Epistles  of  the  Captivity, 
156  ;  the  Pastoral  Epistles,  198. 

Peter,  the  Apostle,  history,  265-269  ;  traditions  about,  269  ;  character, 
270 ;  not  bishop  of  Roman  Church,  148,  275  ;  connection  with 
Mark,  38  ;  author  of  First  Peter,  265  ;  author  of  Second  Peter,  277. 

Peter,  First  Epistle  of,  canonicity,  263 ;  author,  265  ;  persons  ad- 
dressed, 270 ;  occasion  and  object,  271  ;  contents,  272  ;  date  and 
place  of  composition,  274 ;  peculiarities,  276  ;  Second  Epistle  of, 
canonicity,  277  ;  to  whom  written,  282  ;  occasion  and  object,  283  ; 
outline,  284 ;  date  and  place  of  composition,  284  ;  peculiarities, 
285. 

Philemon,  a  Colossian,  169  ;  Onesimus,  his  slave,  170. 

Philemon,  Epistle  to,  canonicity,  167  ;  person  addressed,  169  ;  occasion 
and  design,  170;  contents,  173;  date  and  place  of  composition, 
173 ;  peculiarities,  173. 


332  INDEX  OF  AUTHORS  AND  SUBJECTS. 

Philippi,  situation  of,  189 ;  Paul  visits  it,   190 ;  composition  of  church 

there,  193  ;  sends  present  to  Paul,  192. 
Philippians,  Epistle  to,  canonicity,   187 ;  the   Philippian  church,  189 ; 

occasion  and  object,  193  ;   contents,  195  ;  date  and  place  of  com. 

position,  196 ;  peculiarities,  198. 
Phoebe,  deaconess  of  church  of  Cenchrea,  151  ;  business  in  Rome  and 

carries  Paul's  Epistle  there,  155. 
Plumptre,  Prof.  E.  H.,  210. 
Porter,  Prof.  F.  C,  72. 

Renan,  59,  79,  158,  264. 

Reuss,  143,  168,  223,  251,  281. 

Revelation,  the,  canonicity,  311  ;  authorship,  313  ;  to  whom  addressed, 
317  ;  occasion  and  object,  319;  contents,  320;  date  and  place  of 
composition,  321  ;  interpretation,  324;  peculiarities,  325. 

Romans,  Epistle  to,  canonicity,  145  ;  the  Roman  church,  148 ;  occasion 
and  design,  151;  outline,  153;  date  and  place  of  composition, 
154 ;  peculiarities,  155. 

Rome,  origin  of  church  there,  148  ;  Peter  not  bishop  of,  148  ;  composi- 
tion of  church,  150. 

Salmon,  Prof.  George,  3,  12,  108,  112,  206,  223. 

Sanday,  Prof.  W.,  58,  59. 

Schaff,  Dr.  Philip,  13,  15,  52,  54,  61,  71,  84,  145,  186,  258. 

Schenkel,  83,  188. 

Schleiermacher,  71. 

Schneckenburger,  83. 

Silas  (Silvauus),  Paul's  companion,  90 ;  remains  at  Berea,  loi  ;  rejoins 

Paul,  104  ;  amanuensis  and  bearer  of  First  Peter,  272. 
Sinaitic  manuscript,  40,  181,  239. 
Stalker,  94. 
Stanley,  Dean,  64. 
Storrs,  Dr.  H.  M.,  73. 

Tatian,  5,  17. 

Thayer,  Prof.,  232,  233. 

Theophilus,  Third  Gospel  addressed  to,  49 :  an  historical  personage, 
49 ;  a  representative  man,  50 ;  the  Acts  addressed  to,  82. 

Thessalonians,  First  Epistle  to,  canonicity,  98  ;  church  at  Thessalonica, 
100 ;  occasion  and  object,  102 ;  outline,  103  ;  when  and  where 
written,   104 ;   peculiarities,  105  ;   Second  Epistle  to,  canonicity, 


INDEX  OF  AUTHORS  AND  SUBJECTS.  333 

107;  occasion  and  object,  109;  outline,  no;  date  and  place  of 
composition,  in  ;  peculiarities,  112. 

Tholuck,  152. 

Tigellinus,  86,  194,  197. 

Timothy,  not  writer  of  **  we  passages"  in  Acts,  78  ;  Paul's  companion, 
90;  visit  to  Corinth,  136;  history,  209-211  ;  relation  to  Ephesian 
church,  211. 

Timothy,  First  Epistle  to,  canonicity,  205  ;  the  person  addressed,  209 ; 
occasion  and  object,  211  ;  outline,  211  ;  date  and  place  of  compo- 
sition, 213  ;  peculiarities,  214  ;  Second  Epistle  to,  canonicity,  222  ; 
occasion  and  object,  224 ;  outline,  226 ;  date  and  place  of  compo- 
sition, 227  ;  peculiarities,  228. 

Tischendorf,  5,  39,  148. 

Titus,  carried  First  Corinthians  to  its  destination,  130 ;  returns  to  Paul 
from  Corinth,  135  ;  carries  Second  Corinthians,  136;  history,  215- 
219  ;  character,  217. 

Titus,  Epistle  to,  canonicity,  215  ;  person  addressed,  215  ;  occasion  and 
object,  219  ;  outline,  220;  date  and  place  of  composition,  220. 

Tregelles,     39,  1 48. 

Tychicus,  bearer  of  Epistle  to  Colossians,  162 ;  also  to  the  Ephesians, 
182  ;  Paul  refers  to  him,  224, 

Usher,  Archbishop,  182. 

Van  Oosterzee,  44. 

Vatican  manuscript,  40,  181,  239, 

Wace,  Prof.,  200,  206. 

Warfield,  Dr.  B.  B.,  37,  39,  55,  II2,  Il8,  I2I,  153,  2II,  248,  269,  279, 

280,  282,  288,  312,  320. 
Weidner,  Dr.  R.  F.,  242. 

Weiss,  Bernhard,  22,  29,  83,  108,  138,  150,  200,  201,  207,  266,  314. 
Westcott,  Bishop,  2,  14,  41,  54,  58,  231. 
Westcott  and  Hort,  39,  148. 
Weston,  Dr.  H.  G.,  28. 

Zeller,  83. 


\) 


DATE  DUE 

|WHJ4^ 

f- 

Frp  ^  ?  --^ 

"^ -MN*^ 

^?.v..- 

.;:.«i^^««^'^ 

p^- 

.^-iii**.--..* 

BKtti*^' 

^^,,^,„.*.-— - 

■' 

GAYLORD 

PRINTEDINU.S.A. 

